More good economy news
 

Well this is certainly good news...

Bloomberg Economy Report

Rob :cool:

Great news for America....bad, bad, bad news for Kerry. :D

that was all freaking jiberish crap to me. All I know is people are still loosing jobs by the truckloads and gas prices are soaring. I don't give a rats ass about what Bloomigderg has to say about quarterly 4.6 increases up from 4.3 percent.

Could you enlighten me as to what this report is saying about our economy?

The most telling news that the economy is recovering is CNN is reporting Greenspan hinted at an interest rate hike to forstall apparently an overheated recovery. Food for Thought.

You're not serious. Surely you can read. Even if I told you what I thought it meant, you would not agree with me. It might be more interesting for you to tell me what it DOESN'T mean.

Well, for one, I am cautious about the actual number of new jobs created. The way that number is determined is not defined. Sometimes, "they" include things that are not really new jobs like union workers returning from a strike, etc. So, I am skeptical. In the end though, the overall economy clearly has improved, but the jobs are not following as fast as one would think they would. I mean if manufacturing demand is up, where is the corresponding job increase that accompanies that? The numbers in this article are not refective of that sustained increase :shrug: That is my issue with the Bush economy. That and the fact that the number of job sent overseas grossly outnumbers these "new" jobs and the govt. now owes so much money that tax increases are a necessity. So, W gets, at best, a D from me in economic policy.

Food for thought:

http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed042004d.cfm




Tax increases are never a necessity in my book, unless of course all wasteful spending is stopped and there is still a need for more money to run the government.

Check these out:

http://www.cagw.org/site/PageServer?...ts_pigbook2004

Those are cool sites and thanks for the reference. The first one is incorrect in that it spins the whole outsourcing issue. I mean I get outsourcing in the long run is better from many points of view. But, if your job got outsourced and you had a family to feed, you might not see it as an advantage. I mean these same companies would just take a little from the top people, they could keep these jobs here. But, they do not and that sucks for the little people. These companies also take advantage of labor conditions that would never be allowed here in the U.S. So, there is much more to this issue that suggested in that first article. But, until the law changes, outsourcing is the way it is for the foreseeable future.

Regarding tax increases, I totally agree with you. In fact, I saw there ought to be a flat tax of no more than 20% to the Fed govt. with NO other taxes or fees (no medicare, no SS, no excise tax) NOTHING. But, that will never happen because the special interest will never allow it. Also, the Bush tax cut is not really what is says. Yes, Federal taxes have been cut, but most state and local taxes have had to be raised to compensate for the lessened dollars these entities often receive from the Fed. Govt. Also, W's govt., like ALL other administrations, has vast wastes of money as pointed out in that second article. But, the govt. is so large I am unsure how to stop all of that. I mean W has used the Treas. to put a campaign slogan on recently mailed tax day reminder docs. That cost millions in resources. Yet, W says it was warranted and the expense justified - how he reached that conclusion I am uncertain but I do know this, that is a flat out waste of my tax dollars. Then, all Pres. use AF1 to campaign and pay only a nominal fee. That is a flat out waste. But, there is no end in sight. So, here come the higher taxes as America cannot sustain her debt with the current tax structure :shrug:

You're welcome for the references. Even though someone loses a job through outsourcing, and that is a tough thing to take, these losses are mininimal on the grand scale of total jobs lost. Retraining the displaced employee is essential in a situation like this. That aside, you can't deny that it is plausible that outsourcing can be a good thing by creating more jobs in the long run, amongst other things indicated in the article. I TOTALLY agree that CEOS should take a cut in pay, making those funds available for better use within the company. But I still don't think that that will encourage the company to keep higher paid employees on the payroll. It would still strive to be as profitable as it could, and outsource a job if it meant saving money.



Nothing works better than appplying a little pressure on your elected representatives. Stay informed and let them know, that you know, what they are doing and how they are voting. :)

Let's not forget that the recent number for unemployment claims were MUCH smaller than what they actually were. It was quite the spin from ChimpCo.

He did? When? In his speech yesterday he said (I'm paraphrasing) it was still too soon as we had seen the end of deflation but we still hadn't seen strong enough signs of inflation. The FOMC meets may 4. The beige book comes out today. That should foretell a lot about what's going to happen on May 4. :)

No, I was hoping you or Rob could break it down in your own words. I'm interested as to what this means to you as a fiscal conservative.

[QUOTE=strandinthewind]Well, for one, I am cautious about the actual number of new jobs created. The way that number is determined is not defined. [QUOTE]

Jobless claims were up 30,000 last week. We get a fresh set of numbers tomorrow.

OMG. You finally said it. :shocked:
By the way jwd, using a source such as The Heritage Foundation doesn't really make for a believable case. :rolleyes: