Sense of something wrong

[CA renter]

[quote=SD Realtor]Seems pretty obvious to me that the so called recovery we started was simply the response to stimulus. Perhaps enduring the hard times of a recession/depression and not burrowing further and further into debt may be the bad medicine that will lead to a true recovery rather then simply building up more debt. Pretty much the US and Europe are essentially insolvent. Stimulating insolvent nations with worthless currency doesn’t really solve problems as we are learning.[/quote]

You’ve nailed it again, SDR.

You’d think most people should be able to grasp this, wouldn’t you?

Just think, a few years ago, some of us were saying that we had to go through a rather brutal deflationary recession/depression in order to find a solid foundation from which to build a *sustainable* economic recovery. We said back then, *before any of the nonsensical and entirely unethical bailouts that have/will cost us trillions of dollars* that any government interference in propping up asset prices would **prolong and worsen** the recession/depression over the long run.

We aren’t going to see a recovery until we endure the pain that the past few decades of too much debt/over-leveraging have caused us. We need to unwind the debt and the excess capacity, and we need to begin rewarding labor and productivity vs. gambling and speculation. It really is that simple.

[jeeman]

Yes, i agree with SDRealtor. It was a “sugar-high”, and the positive GDP is mostly just growth in the government.

That is not growth, since government can only grow by taxing a growing private sector or by borrowing from foreigners (i.e. the Chinese). We have to pay all of this back one day. Obama has increased our debt in 2 years more than Bush did in all 8 of his years!

[jeeman]

Yes, i agree with SDRealtor. It was a “sugar-high”, and the positive GDP is mostly just growth in the government.

That is not growth, since government can only grow by taxing a growing private sector or by borrowing from foreigners (i.e. the Chinese). We have to pay all of this back one day. Obama has increased our debt in 2 years more than Bush did in all 8 of his years!

[jeeman]

Yes, i agree with SDRealtor. It was a “sugar-high”, and the positive GDP is mostly just growth in the government.

That is not growth, since government can only grow by taxing a growing private sector or by borrowing from foreigners (i.e. the Chinese). We have to pay all of this back one day. Obama has increased our debt in 2 years more than Bush did in all 8 of his years!

[jeeman]

Yes, i agree with SDRealtor. It was a “sugar-high”, and the positive GDP is mostly just growth in the government.

That is not growth, since government can only grow by taxing a growing private sector or by borrowing from foreigners (i.e. the Chinese). We have to pay all of this back one day. Obama has increased our debt in 2 years more than Bush did in all 8 of his years!

[jeeman]

Yes, i agree with SDRealtor. It was a “sugar-high”, and the positive GDP is mostly just growth in the government.

That is not growth, since government can only grow by taxing a growing private sector or by borrowing from foreigners (i.e. the Chinese). We have to pay all of this back one day. Obama has increased our debt in 2 years more than Bush did in all 8 of his years!

[CA renter]

[quote=jeeman]Yes, i agree with SDRealtor. It was a “sugar-high”, and the positive GDP is mostly just growth in the government.

That is not growth, since government can only grow by taxing a growing private sector or by borrowing from foreigners (i.e. the Chinese). We have to pay all of this back one day. Obama has increased our debt in 2 years more than Bush did in all 8 of his years![/quote]

True about Obama’s debt, but most of that is due to various bailouts and programs that were meant to keep asset prices artificially inflated (not really what most would call a “liberal” cause).

Mind you, I think we needed to spend some public money, mostly to keep people fed and clothed — unemployment insurance was reasonable, IMHO — but the financial/housing/mortgage sector has sucked up trillions of dollars.

[CA renter]

[quote=jeeman]Yes, i agree with SDRealtor. It was a “sugar-high”, and the positive GDP is mostly just growth in the government.

That is not growth, since government can only grow by taxing a growing private sector or by borrowing from foreigners (i.e. the Chinese). We have to pay all of this back one day. Obama has increased our debt in 2 years more than Bush did in all 8 of his years![/quote]

True about Obama’s debt, but most of that is due to various bailouts and programs that were meant to keep asset prices artificially inflated (not really what most would call a “liberal” cause).

Mind you, I think we needed to spend some public money, mostly to keep people fed and clothed — unemployment insurance was reasonable, IMHO — but the financial/housing/mortgage sector has sucked up trillions of dollars.

[CA renter]

[quote=jeeman]Yes, i agree with SDRealtor. It was a “sugar-high”, and the positive GDP is mostly just growth in the government.

That is not growth, since government can only grow by taxing a growing private sector or by borrowing from foreigners (i.e. the Chinese). We have to pay all of this back one day. Obama has increased our debt in 2 years more than Bush did in all 8 of his years![/quote]

True about Obama’s debt, but most of that is due to various bailouts and programs that were meant to keep asset prices artificially inflated (not really what most would call a “liberal” cause).

Mind you, I think we needed to spend some public money, mostly to keep people fed and clothed — unemployment insurance was reasonable, IMHO — but the financial/housing/mortgage sector has sucked up trillions of dollars.

[CA renter]

[quote=jeeman]Yes, i agree with SDRealtor. It was a “sugar-high”, and the positive GDP is mostly just growth in the government.

That is not growth, since government can only grow by taxing a growing private sector or by borrowing from foreigners (i.e. the Chinese). We have to pay all of this back one day. Obama has increased our debt in 2 years more than Bush did in all 8 of his years![/quote]

True about Obama’s debt, but most of that is due to various bailouts and programs that were meant to keep asset prices artificially inflated (not really what most would call a “liberal” cause).

Mind you, I think we needed to spend some public money, mostly to keep people fed and clothed — unemployment insurance was reasonable, IMHO — but the financial/housing/mortgage sector has sucked up trillions of dollars.

[CA renter]

[quote=jeeman]Yes, i agree with SDRealtor. It was a “sugar-high”, and the positive GDP is mostly just growth in the government.

That is not growth, since government can only grow by taxing a growing private sector or by borrowing from foreigners (i.e. the Chinese). We have to pay all of this back one day. Obama has increased our debt in 2 years more than Bush did in all 8 of his years![/quote]

True about Obama’s debt, but most of that is due to various bailouts and programs that were meant to keep asset prices artificially inflated (not really what most would call a “liberal” cause).

Mind you, I think we needed to spend some public money, mostly to keep people fed and clothed — unemployment insurance was reasonable, IMHO — but the financial/housing/mortgage sector has sucked up trillions of dollars.

[Effective Demand]

[quote=jeeman]Obama has increased our debt in 2 years more than Bush did in all 8 of his years![/quote]

This is absolutely true but people don’t look at why it is the case.

Tax revenue dropped because of the recession and “transfer payments” (things like unemployment insurance) spiked.

You can see the Unemployment Insurance spiking here, the spike starts mid-2008:
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/B223RC1?cid=110

You see increases in Medicaid and Social Security because of the recession as well.. this is all baked into the cake no matter who is in office.

Then you look at receipts, tax receipts dropped tremendously because of both the lower tax receipts caused by fewer employed and lower tax rate (some of the lowest in history) because of the ARRA.

I would love to see anyones projections of how the budget would be different under anyones else administration. The vast majority of this was already baked into the cake before whoever came into office in 2009 was sworn in. Anyone believing any different is just believing political rhetoric instead of looking at the data.

As to the original posters post, I actually see many signs of things getting better (total auto sales, weekly unemployment claims, ISM, and just a guess.. todays NFP report). Not necessarily in the commercial RE space but I can tell more people have jobs (more people in stores both working and buying). Things are by no means rosey but I do not believe things are getting worse by any stretch of the imagination.

[Effective Demand]

[quote=jeeman]Obama has increased our debt in 2 years more than Bush did in all 8 of his years![/quote]

This is absolutely true but people don’t look at why it is the case.

Tax revenue dropped because of the recession and “transfer payments” (things like unemployment insurance) spiked.

You can see the Unemployment Insurance spiking here, the spike starts mid-2008:
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/B223RC1?cid=110

You see increases in Medicaid and Social Security because of the recession as well.. this is all baked into the cake no matter who is in office.

Then you look at receipts, tax receipts dropped tremendously because of both the lower tax receipts caused by fewer employed and lower tax rate (some of the lowest in history) because of the ARRA.

I would love to see anyones projections of how the budget would be different under anyones else administration. The vast majority of this was already baked into the cake before whoever came into office in 2009 was sworn in. Anyone believing any different is just believing political rhetoric instead of looking at the data.

As to the original posters post, I actually see many signs of things getting better (total auto sales, weekly unemployment claims, ISM, and just a guess.. todays NFP report). Not necessarily in the commercial RE space but I can tell more people have jobs (more people in stores both working and buying). Things are by no means rosey but I do not believe things are getting worse by any stretch of the imagination.

[Effective Demand]

[quote=jeeman]Obama has increased our debt in 2 years more than Bush did in all 8 of his years![/quote]

This is absolutely true but people don’t look at why it is the case.

Tax revenue dropped because of the recession and “transfer payments” (things like unemployment insurance) spiked.

You can see the Unemployment Insurance spiking here, the spike starts mid-2008:
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/B223RC1?cid=110

You see increases in Medicaid and Social Security because of the recession as well.. this is all baked into the cake no matter who is in office.

Then you look at receipts, tax receipts dropped tremendously because of both the lower tax receipts caused by fewer employed and lower tax rate (some of the lowest in history) because of the ARRA.

I would love to see anyones projections of how the budget would be different under anyones else administration. The vast majority of this was already baked into the cake before whoever came into office in 2009 was sworn in. Anyone believing any different is just believing political rhetoric instead of looking at the data.

As to the original posters post, I actually see many signs of things getting better (total auto sales, weekly unemployment claims, ISM, and just a guess.. todays NFP report). Not necessarily in the commercial RE space but I can tell more people have jobs (more people in stores both working and buying). Things are by no means rosey but I do not believe things are getting worse by any stretch of the imagination.

[Effective Demand]

[quote=jeeman]Obama has increased our debt in 2 years more than Bush did in all 8 of his years![/quote]

This is absolutely true but people don’t look at why it is the case.

Tax revenue dropped because of the recession and “transfer payments” (things like unemployment insurance) spiked.

You can see the Unemployment Insurance spiking here, the spike starts mid-2008:
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/B223RC1?cid=110

You see increases in Medicaid and Social Security because of the recession as well.. this is all baked into the cake no matter who is in office.

Then you look at receipts, tax receipts dropped tremendously because of both the lower tax receipts caused by fewer employed and lower tax rate (some of the lowest in history) because of the ARRA.

I would love to see anyones projections of how the budget would be different under anyones else administration. The vast majority of this was already baked into the cake before whoever came into office in 2009 was sworn in. Anyone believing any different is just believing political rhetoric instead of looking at the data.

As to the original posters post, I actually see many signs of things getting better (total auto sales, weekly unemployment claims, ISM, and just a guess.. todays NFP report). Not necessarily in the commercial RE space but I can tell more people have jobs (more people in stores both working and buying). Things are by no means rosey but I do not believe things are getting worse by any stretch of the imagination.

[Author]

Posts