Congress has lost its mind...

Originally Posted by toranokaze

The reliance upon a pure fiat currency is one of the signs of the fall of a nation.

Back to the gold standard?

[Griff]

More good thinking about our current climate from David Brooks. As long as we punish hard work in this country our culture will continue its decline.


In a few years’ time, Ben is going to be disappointed again. He’s going to find that the outsiders he sent to Washington just screamed at each other at ever higher decibels. He’s going to find that he and voters like him unwittingly created a political culture in which compromise is impermissible, in which institutions are decimated by lone-wolf narcissists who have no interest in or talent for crafting legislation. Nothing will get done.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Griff

... Nothing will get done. [/i]

That's exactly what some people want..... until they need something to get done.

Originally Posted by Griff

More good thinking about our current climate from David Brooks. As long as we punish hard work in this country our culture will continue its decline.


In a few years’ time, Ben is going to be disappointed again. He’s going to find that the outsiders he sent to Washington just screamed at each other at ever higher decibels. He’s going to find that he and voters like him unwittingly created a political culture in which compromise is impermissible, in which institutions are decimated by lone-wolf narcissists who have no interest in or talent for crafting legislation. Nothing will get done.

I disagree with Brook's basic premise and its not clear at all how the current monetary policy has punished hard work. Ron Paul's "free trade" solution is certainly not the answer and would likely result in even more jobs going overseaS.

A recent study found more entrepreneurs starting new businesses in 2009 than at any other time in the past 14 years....in part, because, even with tight lending, money is cheap right now as a result of the current Fed policy.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/9...ew-businesses-

Add to that the recent (and largest) middle class and small business tax cuts and tax credits.... but these dont come without a cost to the deficit as well.

I do agree with Brooks on one point. Its easy to be on the outside criticizing and waving their signs, like the Tea Party crowd.

Its much harder to offer constructive and realistic solutions.

The US debt has to be addressed, but there are no simple solutions. Certainly not the notion of cutting spending AND cutting taxes, given that the largest and fastest growing component of the debt is entitlement programs (Social Security, Medicare....)

The solution will require compromise and tough decisions including cutting spending AND raising taxes.

added:
I am still perplexed at how silent the Tea Party crowd have been on the need for financial regulatory reform....another indication that they, at least the token leaders (Palin and now Rand Paul and to a lesser extent, Gingrich), are not interested in consensus building as much as they are in imposing their own narrow ideology.

To some degree, IMO, the Cellar is a microcosm of the country. Alot of complaining by those who dont like the current policy direction, but very little in the way of alternative constructive solutions.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by Redux

I disagree with Brook's basic premise and its not clear at all how the current monetary policy has punished hard work.

I don't think Brooks would ever endorse a "hard" currency as it can be too inflexible, suppressing economic expansion. That said, as long as our currency is losing value saving is punished. To go along with what you said we will have to raise taxes and cut services to rebuild the integrity of the dollar. We will have to cut more services than Democrats want and raise more taxes than Republicans want. Both parties live in a fantasy world created by ideology, we only have to read Krugman today to witness the self-delusion. I believe it may be possible to ease the pain in an economic contraction through government spending, but you'll never hear the left calling for cuts during an economic boom, much as we never hear Republicans complain about debt created by war-making.

Getting centrists elected is the tough part since they can't speak to blind ideology. They have no core group to hold in place while they reach out to other voters.

Rand Paul is going to get creamed defending BP the way he is. Sometimes corporations really are the bad guys.

Growing small business should be the focus of centrists. Let's not create a regulatory morass that suppresses start-ups, but we damn well better regulate and hold big business accountable for environmental and economic destruction.

[lookout123]

Originally Posted by Redux

A recent study found more entrepreneurs starting new businesses in 2009 than at any other time in the past 14 years....in part, because, even with tight lending, money is cheap right now as a result of the current Fed policy.

I think you'll find new businesses tend to launch more as unemployment climbs.

[lookout123]

Quit being such a spoil sport. Fiat currency makes it easier for us to vote ourselves money from the public treasury.

I would disagree with you that the monetary policy of the last decade (or two) was a "major driver" in the near collapse.

I would attribute more to the lack of regulation, specifically, the virtual repeal of Glass-Steagall (and the resulting housing bubble) and to a lesser extent, the grossly over-priced dot.com bubble.

added:
I am not a fan of Milton Friedman, the Hoover/Cato crowd and free market, trickle down economics, but I agree with them on this:

We are not arguing that Greenspan's policies were perfect. Nor should anything that follows be construed as a defense of central banking or of the Federal Reserve. Particularly alarming is the way the lender-of-last-resort function has been expanding the moral-hazard safety net and mispricing risk, a trend to which Greenspan no doubt contributed. Our preferred ideal would combine abolition of the Fed and unregulated free banking.
(note: I dont agree with abolishing the Fed and unregulated free banking)

Nonetheless, Alan Greenspan stands out as the most competent--and arguably the only competent--helmsman of United States monetary policy since the creation of the Federal Reserve System. As Milton Friedman observed upon Greenspan's retirement, "For the first 70 years after it opened in 1914, the Fed did far more harm than good, presiding over inflation in two World Wars, converting a moderate recession into the great depression, and then in 1970s, producing the most serious peacetime inflation in our nation's history." By contrast, Greenspan's "performance has indeed been remarkable."
(I dont agree here either..that the Fed policy was largely responsible for the great depression.)

(here is where I agree)
Greenspan not only oversaw relatively low and stable inflation, but also ushered in a striking decline in the volatility of real gross domestic product. Although defenders of macroeconomic intervention often suggest that government policies after World War II dampened business cycles, the truly significant change should be dated at 1987, the year Greenspan assumed office.

http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/...reenspans.html

And, post-Greenspan, I think Bernanke's short-term policy was necessary and correct, given the state of the economy....but should now begin to be tightened as the economy recovers, as he suggested earlier this year.

[TheMercenary]

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- On Sept. 15, 2008, America woke up to its worst financial meltdown in generations.

Nearly two years and thousands of pages of legislation later, it is still unclear whether the government has found a way to prevent a similar collapse from happening again.

The Senate passed a financial reform bill Thursday with the aim of stopping future crises before they start. The bill addresses several leading causes: crazy lending practices, risky bets by banks, inflated credit ratings on junky assets and an inability to wind down collapsing financial institutions.

Will it prevent the next crisis? Even proponents of the legislation concede it might not.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/24/news...ex.htm?cnn=yes

[spudcon]

Will it prevent the next crisis? Even proponents of the legislation concede it WILL not.

Fixed it for ya.

[TheMercenary]

I agree, it will not. More smoke and mirrors by the Demoncratically controlled Congressional Whores, as it was with the Healthcare Reform and Stimulus Millions of Shovel Ready Jobs Package. A big fat FAIL as we are still at a near 10% unemployment rate. Elections are just around the corner folks. Vote the scumbags out.

[TheMercenary]

Democrats set to consider $197 billion in unpaid-for ‘emergency spending’

Democrats in Congress have added $173 billion in new spending to the federal deficit in just three months since they passed a law requiring that any new expenditures be offset by cuts elsewhere in the budget.

They will try this week to add another $197 billion in two separate measures. The House is expected to vote Wednesday on a package of extensions in government aid to unemployed Americans, Medicaid funding for states, and tax breaks that will add $134 billion to the $1.4 trillion deficit.

The Senate is expected to vote this week on a $63 billion supplemental spending bill. Half of that amount would go to the war in Afghanistan. The rest is for aid to Haiti, settlement of land claims with American Indians and discrimination claims of black farmers, compensation of war veterans exposed to Agent Orange, foreign aid to Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan, and replenishment of the government’s disaster relief fund.

Republicans, who oppose some of the spending outright, say that at the very least all but the $33 billion that the Pentagon needs to continue funding a surge of 30,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan should be offset by spending cuts.

“Anything that’s not directly related to fighting the wars should be paid for,” said Sen. John Thune, South Dakota Republican.

Some of the extenders bill is paid for. The extenders bill actually has a higher price tag than $134 bill, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The full cost is $174 billion. But the measure does create $40 billion in revenues.

So far, it appears that Democrats plan to escape their own rules that require them to offset all new spending by declaring the measures to be “emergency spending.”

New spending can also be offset by tax increases under what is known as pay-as-you-go rules, but Republicans oppose tax hikes most of the time and say the problem is too much spending. Many Democrats believe tax increases are necessary but realize that they are highly unpopular with voters.

Another $23 billion in emergency spending on the nation’s schools is waiting in the wings as well.

Aware that moves toward spending discipline are needed at a time when the national debt is approaching the $13 trillion mark and deficits are slated to add another $10 trillion to that over the next decade, President Obama on Monday proposed to Congress legislation that would allow him to pick items out of legislation sent to him by Congress and mark them for elimination. The measure would give Congress final veto power, however, over whether the president’s cuts are approved or rejected.

The measure is not expected to be passed by Congress.

When Congress passed PAYGO legislation in February saying they would not spend any more taxpayer money without cutting fat out of the budget elsewhere, Obama hailed lawmakers for committing the country to fiscal responsibility.

“The United States of America should pay as we go and live within our means again — just like responsible families and businesses do,” Obama said on Feb. 18, a few days after signing statutory PAYGO into law.

PAYGO was first enacted in 1990, with even stricter rules than the current law, but expired in 2002. When Democrats regained control of Congress in 2007 they put PAYGO rules in place but those did not carry the weight of law and were flouted constantly.

At a town hall meeting in New Hampshire two weeks before PAYGO passed, Obama said of the new law: “That’s how we’ll get our deficit under control.”

“That’s something that Democrats and Republicans should be able to agree to — if we could just stop playing politics, get past the Washington game,” Obama said.

Only not so much.

Since Congress passed PAYGO, Democrats have added $173 billion in new spending without cutting anything to offset it, according to a tally by Republicans in the Senate. Republican senators have on a few occasions tried to block the spending, but with almost no success.

Thune, the GOP’s chief deputy whip in the Senate, said that in particular when the extenders bill comes to the Senate later this week, “there isn’t anybody, I think, in our conference who is going to abide $150 billion in spending that’s going to be added to the debt.”

Thune suggested that unused and unobligated funds from the $787 billion stimulus bill, passed a year ago, be redirected to pay for the new spending.

The Obama administration and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, did not respond to requests for comment.


WTF

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/05/25/de...#ixzz0p5kXVxdU


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/05/25/de...#ixzz0p5kKiY00

[spudcon]

Wow Merc, that post was as long as one of TW's

[Shawnee123]

Well, except tw Writes his own Posts.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

I agree, it will not. More smoke and mirrors by the Demoncratically controlled Congressional Whores, as it was with the Healthcare Reform and Stimulus Millions of Shovel Ready Jobs Package. A big fat FAIL as we are still at a near 10% unemployment rate. Elections are just around the corner folks. Vote the scumbags out.

Fail.

Cite.

Prove it.