Tag: economic recovery

Who is rich? Don’t ask Mitch!

Who is rich? Don’t ask Mitch!

Posted on by Jack

Earlier I had reminded Georgia voters that the run-off Georgia election has big consequences. If either David Perdue or Kelly Loeffler are returned to the Senate the Republicans have a majority. This would almost certainly mean that Mitch McConnell would have control of the Senate.

In a not-so-surprising way he reminded us why this would be a disaster. You see old Mitch seems to think folks making $75,000 a year or less are rich and they don’t deserve help getting through this pandemic. If you don’t believe this of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, read the article that starts this way,
Continue reading “Who is rich? Don’t ask Mitch!”

Georgia election has big consequences

Georgia election has big consequences

Posted on by Jack

The run-off Georgia election has big consequences. If either David Perdue or Kelly Loeffler are returned to the Senate the Republicans have a majority. Mitch McConnell is in power and and we can expect more gridlock and paralysis in the Senate. On the other hand, if Georgia elects both Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock then the Democrats control the Senate and Joe Biden can do things such as providing relief when needed, improving voting rights, and healing the country.

The latest example is how Republicans are blocking emergency COVID-19 relief.
Continue reading “Georgia election has big consequences”

Lies about the great economy

Lies about the great economy

Posted on by Jack

It is well known that President Trump has had a problem with the truth. Lies, misrepresentations and alternative facts have been apparent for a long time.

A fact checker put the number of lies and misrepresentations at over 20,000 since the beginning of his term and that was the number over a month ago . I’m not sure how many more lies and misrepresentations have passed his lips in recent weeks. We can argue over the exact number in this term but it is clear it is a big number.
Continue reading “Lies about the great economy”

Supply and Demand

Supply and Demand

Posted on by Jack

Supply and demand is important economically. But since the Reagan revolution in politics, we have largely focused on growing the supply side.

Now with the current emphasis on austerity, we are actively cutting more and more into the demand side.

Is it any wonder that our economy is weak and not recovery very quickly?

Sequester and Heath care reform (aka ObamaCare)

Sequester and Heath care reform (aka ObamaCare)

Posted on by Jack

Just 2 short notes today.

1. The Sequester is nearly upon us. The consequences have been much covered in the press. Long lines at airport security, cut-backs in air traffic control, military cuts, fewer food inspections, and many more. Additionally the cut-backs seem likely to hurt the economy which is only slowly recovering from the recession.

I see little movement toward a solution. In fact, both house of Congress took a week off last week, leaving only a few days to solve this.

2. Heath care reform (aka ObamaCare) is in place. Some find aspects they dislike or that they think will harm the economy. The only call I hear from these groups is “repeal” or “repeal and replace”. Since we have already passed health care reform and it has passed constitutional muster, why not work to fix those part that you disagree with?

Jon Huntsman would be a good choice for Treasury Secretary

Jon Huntsman would be a good choice for Treasury Secretary

Posted on by Jack

I wrote about this a few months back but wanted to repeat that Jon Huntsman would be a good choice for Treasury Secretary . Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has announced his intention to leave. Now that we have settled the fiscal cliff issues in part (but also put off parts for a few months), President Obama must work with the Republicans in Congress to continue the recovery and improve upon the economy of the United States.

Both sides have very different ideas about what we should do and there is a lack of trust. Trust would certainly improve the chances of finding some middle ground that both sides can agree on. Perhaps one way to improve that trust is by naming a new Treasury Secretary that both sides can trust. Continue reading “Jon Huntsman would be a good choice for Treasury Secretary”

Crazy Idea: the NRA stimulus that might save the economy

Crazy Idea: the NRA stimulus that might save the economy

Posted on by Jack

After the tragic child murders at Sandy Hook Elementary, the NRA proposed a plan to put armed guards in each school. There are about 99,000 public schools in the country according to National Center for Education Statistics.

NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said:

I call on Congress today to act immediately to appropriate whatever is necessary to put armed police officers in every single school in this nation and to do it now to make sure that blanket safety is in place when our kids return to school in January.

A few days later (on December 23) he added on Meet the Press:

If it’s crazy to call for putting police and armed security in our school to protect our children, then call me crazy. I’ll tell you what the American people– I think the American people think it’s crazy not to do it. It’s the one thing that would keep people safe.

And the N.R.A. is going to try to do that. We’re going to support an immediate appropriation before Congress to put police officers in every school. And we’re going to work with Asa Hutchinson, who has agreed to work with us to put together a voluntary program, drawing on retired military, drawing on retired police, drawing on former Secret Service, and all these people that can actually go in and make our kids safe.

So he clearly calls for both volunteers and armed police. It is unclear how the numbers will work but with almost 100,000 schools we are clearly talking about a large numbers of jobs and a big federal expenditure.

There would be details to work out and these are by no means trivial. How do the volunteers work with the police? How volunteers will be recruited? How will they screened so we are not creating a worse situation by putting armed people into schools who may themselves cause a problem?

Could there be problems with students or others taking guns from the guards and shooting? This may sound crazy too but a weapon was taken from a police officer is the police station and 3 officers were wounded. (see Police station shooting story).

Just a few months ago, police shot 9 bystanders while killing a lone gunman. Since these were trained police officers, we cannot dismiss the possibility that students or teachers could be shot accidently by the guards.

Many schools will need multiple guards as one person can’t see everything and may not be sufficient to repel the attacker or attackers. Should we depend exclusively on volunteers or police here or have a mix?

Should we think about something similar for other places where the public gathers? Does the private sector need to add an armed presence in shopping malls, private schools, movies theaters, churches, etc.

Do governments need to post armed guards at other facilities open to the public? The Post Office and motor vehicle offices come to mind but there are many others.

This plan is clearly a dilemma for many politicians. Some will like the idea of armed guards in schools as proposed by the NRA but will not like the idea of a large federal program particularly one that uses federal money to create jobs and stimulate the economy. Others will like the idea of a federal stimulus but oppose armed guards in schools.

But it gives each side a bit of what they like. So maybe it is a potential route for compromise. Maybe throw a few more contentious issues into the mix and we’ll have something.

I think the plan will not work but rather than dismissing it as crazy, we should think it through.

Fiscal Cliff: Be flexible in seeking solutions

Fiscal Cliff: Be flexible in seeking solutions

Posted on by Jack

Last year we had a big standoff on raising the national debt ceiling. It was very strange in that Congress has repeatedly passed budgets with deficits over the past several decades and suddenly decided that the national debt had grown too large. Then they decided the best course was just to stop borrowing money.

An apparently simple solution to a growing problem. But perhaps was too simple. People with bonds would like to be paid when the bonds come due. Soldiers and civilian employees both like to be paid. There are quite a few valid concerns raised by this approach.

So in recognition that the problem was a bit more complex then just not spending, Congress agreed to allow debt to rise but mean while would appoint a Super-committee to decide on both revenues and budget cuts which would once again bring fiscal sanity to our federal budget. And to make sure the job was done right, Congress proclaimed that there would be draconian budget cuts and tax increases if we did not have a plan in place by the beginning of next year (which is just a few weeks away now).

So one of the sticking points is income taxes. President Obama is pretty insistent on raising the tax rates on households making over a quarter million dollars per year. Republicans are insistent that this rate won’t be raised.

Everyone would like to see tax cuts continue on for households making less than a quarter million dollars per year (About 98% of us). But Republicans say they won’t agree unless the households making over a quarter million dollars per year are included (about the top 2%).

If there is not an agreement taxes rise on everyone which combined with the draconian budget cuts might be enough to throw this weakly recovering economy back into recession.

So a compromise is needed. Both sides like to repeat their position and do insist that it is the correct position. But there is some movement behind closed doors toward the compromise we need. Some days the reports are promising, other days not so much. Let us hope both side can show some flexibility.

Huntsman for Treasury

Huntsman for Treasury

Posted on by Jack

It seems we are in the market for a new Treasury Secretary. It is a very important position in the cabinet. President Obama must work with the Republicans in Congress to continue the recovery and improve upon the economy of the United States.

The problem is that both sides have very different ideas about what we should do and there is a lack of trust. Trust would certainly improve the chances of finding some middle ground that both sides can agree on. Perhaps one way to improve that trust is by naming a new Treasury Secretary that both sides can trust.

Jon Huntsman ran in the Republican presidential primary and was a successful governor of a conservative state. He was also President Obama’s ambassador to China. Both sides have reason to trust him.

In addition, Jon Huntsman has made serious proposals about economic regulation and job growth and is a good choice as Treasury Secretary.

Only 12 Million jobs, Governor Romney

Only 12 Million jobs, Governor Romney

Posted on by Jack

Mitt Romney has mentioned many times that his policies will add 12 million jobs.

I wrote about this before but thought an update is in order.

He says this will happen over his 4 year administration and it will be due to his five-point plan.

Or at least that is what he seems to be saying.

Turns out there is no strong tie to his 5 point plan, just a tie to average growth returning. Over 4 years this breaks down to a quarter million jobs added per month.

When Obama took over as President we were losing over 800,000 jobs per month. He turned that around and we have been gaining jobs since early 2010. The figures bounce around from month to month but have been over a quarter million some months and significantly less others but always positive. (See Is the Obama job recovery really so bad? And the stimulus worked ).

Is it better to trust the man who got us out of the job decline and is actually gaining jobs or the man who says he is going to do somewhat better but has no evidence to back-up his claim?

Is the Obama job recovery really so bad? And the stimulus worked

Is the Obama job recovery really so bad? And the stimulus worked

Posted on by Jack

There has been much complaint about the Obama job recovery and many think we should trust our economy to Governor Romney because President Obama is doing such a bad job. His stimulus failed they say.

In my view President Obama is doing a good job considering where we came from 4 years ago and the lack of cooperation from Republicans in Congress who have blocked many of his attempts in the past 2 years to fix the jobs situation.

There is absolutely no credible evidence that Republican ideas would help the job market. Well, there are theories and “Atlas Shrugged” but no real evidence. After all, Republican ideas were put into effect in the years before the economic melt-down and we saw the result. Why are these ideas and this party going to fix things now?

So I thought it would be a good idea to revisit an old post from over a year ago and update it with new job figures.

The graph below shows the month to month change in private employment during the months from January 2008 to October 2012. The numbers on the right indicate thousands of jobs gained or lost each month. All numbers and the graph are from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) of the U.S. Department of Labor.

The graph clearly shows accelerating job loss in 2008 hitting over 800,0000 jobs lost in January 2009, staying in that area for several months, followed by a decreasing job loss, and emerging into positive job growth in early 2010. The job growth is too small bring down our stubbornly high unemployment rate but it is moving in the right direction. We need to create more jobs to keep up with the constantly growing labor force. Total job figures are a bit lower as we have the number of jobs in the public sector decreasing in many months.

Jobs Chart BLS OCT 2012

There are quite a few things that could influence the economy in this time. The slow-down in job decline in early 2009 seems to suggest that stimulus plan seems to have worked but is now slowing down. The TARP program passed in late 2008 may have helped this recovery. And one could argue that things would be better or worse if we had followed a different plan.

So President Obama seems to be doing as well as could be expected and it seems the most sensible course would be to re-elect him and re-elect fewer Republicans to Congress.

Mitt Romney is now the candidate of big change or big flip-flop

Mitt Romney is now the candidate of big change or big flip-flop

Posted on by Jack

So Mitt Romney is now the candidate of big change. Sounds very 2008 when President Obama was a candidate of hope and change.

I guess the difference is that I liked some of President Obama’s changes. I think it is good that health insurers can’t turn down people with pre-existing medical conditions. And it is good that insurers cannot cap your coverage if you have some really big claims. It seems good that insurers cannot find a reason to deny coverage if you are sick. There will be problems with health care reform and we need to elect people who will modify the reform to get it right.

I like that the economy is not falling apart and we are not losing hundreds of thousands of jobs each month as we did in the year before Obama took office. It seems the Presidents Bush and Obama (and Congress) took the right steps in late 2008 and 2009 to reverse the trend. Certainly things could be much better and I think they probably would be if Republicans in congress did not block many of President Obama’s efforts. But I see nothing to indicate Governor Romney would do any better.

I like that Obama seems to have a thoughtful foreign policy.

But Governor Romney is also known for his changes or flip-flops. I am surprised he wants to remind voters about that.

Slippery Mitt moves toward the middle in the debate

Slippery Mitt moves toward the middle in the debate

Posted on by Jack

It has been widely said that Mitt Romney clearly won the first presidential debate held on October 3, 2012. Here is a transcript of the first presidential debate.

How did he do it? It comes down to that President Obama was unprepared for another shake of the Etch a Sketch when Slippery Mitt was asked about the tax plan that he has been proposing for a year or so. President Obama asked how it was possible to have to have this large tax cut and greatly increase military spending without adding to the deficit. Yes, old Mitt slipped away while denying any increase in the deficit was possible under his plan. He said that he would not increase the deficit. He said it, so it can’t happen.

“My plan is not to put in place any tax cut that will add to the deficit.”, said Mitt Romney. This seems to be something new. Before it was a kind of article of faith that if you cut taxes the economy would boom and revenue would pour into the federal coffers. But does this mean that if the massive tax cuts look like they might cause a deficit, that the tax cuts are off the table? Are they conditional on Congress agreeing to end enough deductions to offset the lower rates. Do we have any particulars on which deductions will be lost?

Further, it is widely assumed that this severely conservative budget will be a decrease over the present budget. So if we massively increase military spending and decrease taxes rates (although that will be wholly of partly offset by decreasing unspecified deductions), it stands to reason that some pretty big cuts must come out of the other stuff. But when President Obama questioned Slippery Mitt on how he would cut education, Mitt slipped away again by saying he would not cut education. So now it seems like the cuts elsewhere would be more severe.

You may have noticed that he did not agree to any of Obama’s expansions to education (more teachers and so forth), he just said he would not cut. Exactly what that means, I do not know. But it does sound much more moderate that previous stances.

So I think most of us figured Mitt Romney would eventually slip away from some of the more conservative positions he has taken and try to move toward the middle but he surprised me and maybe the President by his quick and bold moves during the debate.

But the lack of specifics in his proposals has been maddening. Of course, for most of these changes he has to work with Congress. So it would be foolish to say “this is what will happen”. But it would be nice if he took a position and said “this is what I propose”. Instead all we get are vague statements like – I know how to create 12 million jobs or I will cut the budget.

So trust in Slippery Mitt and trust in our highly-regarded Congress. It seems like such a good plan.

Deficits matter only if the other party did it

Deficits matter only if the other party did it

Posted on by Jack

About 10 years ago, Vice President Cheney supposedly declared that “Reagan proved deficits don’t matter” as the administration moved us from the surplus at the end of the Clinton administration to the deficits of the Bush administration. Then a few days ago Mr. Cheney realized deficits do matter .

At first I was a bit confused. But then I realized, the difference. When a Republican run a big deficit, it doesn’t matter. But if a Democrat does it, it is terrible. This is true even if the Democrat inherited much of the deficit from his Republican predecessor.

We should all be grateful that this is cleared up at last and that we have a two party system to guide us through this difficult time.

Disingenuous crap: Obama has no jobs plan

Disingenuous crap: Obama has no jobs plan

Posted on by Jack

I liked the phase “disingenuous crap” so much to describe Romney’s claim that Obama has no jobs plan that I stole it from Andrew Sullivan. This is the third in his series on the big lies of Mitt Romney. This one seemed most relevant to today’s post so I referenced it here. But all are worth reading.

But it is rather a big claim that Obama has a plan so here is a second reference from the Washington Post. It seems it would have been more accurate for Mr. Romney to claim that President Obama has no plan that Republicans support.

Obama has proposed a plan and it has been blocked by Republicans who don’t want him to succeed. But he is succeeding. It seems likely to me that the success would be much faster if the Republicans in Congress would do their job and govern.

The highest Republican party objective seems to be to deny Obama a second term. That is a rather short video with Mitch McConnell defending his now famous quote. But if you have the time you might enjoy an almost 9 minute video from Media Matters which includes several Republican quotes and a bit of context.

Despite opposition President Obama is succeeding in getting our economy to grow. Of course, growth would be faster if he had the support of Congress. Think about that when you vote.

But if you remember, we were losing about 800,000 jobs per month when President Obama took office. The job loss slowed and for the past few years we have actually been gaining jobs each month. (See Stimulus worked, more jobs needed.)

That post is about a year old, see Chart Book: The Legacy of the Great Recession which bring things up to date and adds quite a bit more on the recovery.