Krugman and the State of the Economy

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Sayhey, Dec 30, 2003.

  1. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #1
    In his latest article New York Times columnist Paul Krugman looks at the latest holiday sales and the overall impact of the economic expansion for different strata of US society.

    Just whose recovery is this?
     
  2. g5man macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    #2
    Well I thought it would take a year before this nonsense surfaced. But it only took one day.

    This complaint has been around since Carl Marx. It is desperation time since there is nothing really left to attack. The economy is back; the jobs are coming back so the only item to bitch about is that the rich are getting richer. Well we are getting richer and we are going to kick some DNC butt because there are millions and millions of us. The middle class is very happy and growing because our taxes are lower, our stocks are higher, and our debt is close to interest free. And those of us who choose to work harder instead of asking for extensions on the unemployment benefits or praying our unions can give us raises are actually making more money every year. This will continue as we vote into office someone who actually knows what they are doing.

    That felt pretty good
    :D
     
  3. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #3
    It's interesting that he doesn't bring up all those high wage, middle class jobs that are being shipped overseas. The hi tech industry is at the top of the list and it's been made very clear that virtually ever company in the US is shipping its IT work overseas. I wonder how long it will be before the IT industry becomes unionized?

    The one thing that keeps coming to mind is that if there is continual downward pressure on jobs and wages in the US, who will be able to buy all the products and services of these companies that are shipping jobs overseas?
     
  4. wwworry macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    #4
    By all means, vote with your pocket book. In fact, everyone should. But let's stop pretending that the republican party is anything other than the party of the rich.
     
  5. g5man macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    #5
    You forgot that today someone who makes more than $35K a year is considered rich. So the GOP is actually the party of the middle class. The DNC is the party of a few middle class, the very very rich, and the lower classes. If you will go back to my GOP gaining thread you will see that the only area in which the DNC holds a major advantage is with those making under $20K a year.
     
  6. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #6
    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
    MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
    HEHEHEHEHEHEHEHE

    Thanks for the laugh. That was the funniest thing I've seen in quite a while.


    I actually agree with you about the definition of rich. If you aren't making $125,000 a year you aren't rich and I want you to get there ASAP. Defining rich as anything over of impoverished is no good.
     
  7. wwworry macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    #7
    Who was that Rep. congressman from Virginia who thoght middle class was $300k/year?
     
  8. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #8
    ...and those rich people are shopping at neiman-marcus instead of walmart. wow, looks like you and krugman actually agree.

    now i'll no longer have to decide between you two for economic insight ;-)
     
  9. g5man macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    #9

    But I thought you did not like Walmart because they pay their employees peanuts and drive everyone out of business.
     
  10. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #10
    i don't recall ever saying anything about walmart.
     
  11. g5man macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    #11
    I was not referring to you personally but someone here who agrees with most of what you say and you also agree with most of what they say. I am not going to research the post, but weather you post it or any of your forum supporters to me it is the same thing
     
  12. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #12
    that's absolutely horrible. do you treat people like this in real life? it indicates a complete lack of respect.

    in other news, i once stood in a room w/ about 10 people and argued that the conjuctive is spelled 'whether'. the dictionary, of course, proved me right.

    it's always amusing to me when i'm told i'm wrong because everyone else in the room disagrees with me.

    but then the facts bear me right.
     
  13. g5man macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    #13
    Lets see if we can get back on topic.

    Krugman claims that yes the economy is really taking off and therefore incomes should do the same. One can not argue with that notion, if one does not understand how the economy works.

    Incomes are increasing and that is what is important. If he thinks that a balanced budget or universal healthcare or increases in taxes will further increase incomes, then he is crazy.
     
  14. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #14
    A balanced budget would sure as hell keep interest rates from going up, so I don't see how you can make that arguement.

    And once again, repealing a tax reduction that hasn't taken effect yet is not raising taxes. Not unless you want to call not cutting spending a spending increase too.
     
  15. g5man macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    #15
    Actually in 98 when we had a balanced budget the interest rate on my credit card was 15% and on my house 7.25% for 30 years. With that terrible deficit houses have appreciated quite nicely as interest rates have gone down. My house has doubled in price. And there are millions of people who are experiencing this same affect. Democrats and Republicans who will vote GOP. Krugeman does not know what he is talking about when it comes to income.

    Now I pay 0% on my credit card and only 4.25% for 15 years on my house.

    So I am not worried even if rates went up 3 points in the next two. But they won't.

    The tax cut has taken affect. We all already agreed that it contributed to the stimulus and we saw the GDP go up. Millions of families received checks for their kids. Tax cuts on capital expenses have been in affect for 6 months. Tax cuts on capital gains have been in affect as well. There was a torrid of bad predictions when the dividend taxes were past. The markets went up instead of down like it was predicted. My IRA went up over 50% in 10 months and will go up even more in 2004. That was due to good investing and a very optimistic view of the future. It does pay off to be an optimist you know.:)
     
  16. Sayhey thread starter macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #16
    If you are locked into those rates, you are doing well. You should also thank Clinton for the economy that made them possible, but I suppose that is too much to ask. Now with the deficits increasing it is likely that the strain on the economy will produce higher rates and those of us not locked in like you will bear the burden. Hey, but you got yours, right?

    Let mean see, part of the point of Krugman's article was that those with the highest incomes benefit mostly from this recovery and out of proportion to the rest of us. You might have just proved his point. :eek:

    Sorry, I must be a marxist.
     
  17. g5man macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    #17
    You missed my point. Under Clinton my rates were high. Under Bush they are low. But I am not giving Bush credit one bit for lower interest rates nor for the 0 inflation that I forgot to mention.

    I am not rich. I know Krugman thinks I am but I am not. My house is small and my income does not even come close to $125K. And no I was not the only one who got his. There are millions and millions of us. Once again if interest rates went up things are not going to fall apart. Heck we had 18% interest rates for houses in the late 1970's.

    And you are not a marxist otherwise you would have left the US long ago.:) Krugman and his people love to play with the social order of things and attribute an apparent lack of unfairness in our system to guilt people into voting Democratic.
     
  18. Sayhey thread starter macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #18
    I didn't miss anything. Your interest rates are a direct result of the economic policies of the Clinton years. That's both Clinton and Greenspan's policies.

    You may not be rich, but you already have a home and I would guess established credit to boot. Do you think the growing deficit will effect the prospects of young people trying to establish for themselves what you already have?

    You are right on one thing - I'm not a marxist. Although, I don't shy away from any insights that Marx and Engels may have had out of some fear of contamination. Class is a real objective phenomenon. Class antagonisms can be very real things brought on by policies that exacerbate class differences and the mobility of people between classes. Krugman and others have rightfully pointed out how Bush's policies do just that.
     
  19. g5man macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    #19
    Well then lets have Mrs. Clinton run and try to show us all how we are better off because of her husbands policies.

    LOL:D

    You must be joking. I wonder why all those democratic candidates are not using that flawed reasoning in their campaigns? Because most people are much smarter than that.

    Lets see if we use that method then we can assume the boom of the 90's was a result of Reagan's policies. And the recession of 2001 as a result of Clinton's policies.:D :D
     
  20. Sayhey thread starter macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #20
    Not joking one bit. When did those interest rates start coming down? I suppose you think it was all after January 2001? When did the effects on the deficit from Bush's policies become clear? As I recall he entered the Presidency with a projected surplus. You are so good at predictions - well here is one for you. With the growth of the deficit you will also see the rise in interest rates. I'm glad you have your house and security now - though you had better hope your job can't be shipped to India.
     
  21. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #21
    Paul Krugman is a widely respected, Nobel prize winning economist. The Nobel Prize committee is not known for choosing crazy people for its economic and science prizes. Perhaps you'd better take a look at what he is saying before you make such silly pronouncements. He's not stupid nor do I believe you are but fanning the flames doesn't make for a good discussion it only creates a bonfire.
     
  22. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #22
    i disbelieve you, unless you mean you pay it off every month
     
  23. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #23
    it's valid to challenge krugman on his political tangent, but folly to take him on when he's doing economic analysis. he was the guy who predicted the crash of the asian tiger economies -- he took a lot of crap before he was proved correct.
     
  24. g5man macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    #24
    No I don't pay it off every month. Remember I am not rich. For the last two and a half years I have transfered most of my debt to 0 percent cards. With my Quicken I keep good tabs on when things are due and transfer on while I pay it off in monthly payments.

    Having good credit helps a great deal, but I starting getting loans since I was 16 so I have a long history with an excellent track record.
     
  25. wwworry macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    #25
    ah the natural order of things...

    You can't deny that the income gap betwen the wealthiest and the poorest is the highest since 1929. Also tax policy does have an effect. It is pretty simple if you strip away all the name calling and marxist fear mongering.

    It just depends on what kind of country you want to live in - one where there are a few very very wealthy people and lots of poor people or one with a strong middle class.

    When has Bush like policies ever led to a stronger middle class? We have historical precedents. Show me just one little bit of precedent that shows supply-side economics works. There are plenty of other examples that show the bottom-up economics works better for everyone.
     

Share This Page