While we contemplate stimulus vs austerity . . .

. . . herwith a tweet from Robert Reich, well known Clinton-era Commie (h/t UTMB, here); I will now add him to my Twitter feed.

14 responses to “While we contemplate stimulus vs austerity . . .

  1. He’s right but he’s ignoring that how they did this is part of why unemployment is at 12 -15% now. They gutted the job creators, small to midsized businesses, with their taxes. They also drove the large businesses overseas, though that only sped that loss of jobs.

    Like

  2. The 21 million jobs created from Jan ’93 to Jan ’01? Was that an illusion? That said, Clinton signed NAFTA (Bush 41’s treaty) and that made the exportation of labor jobs worse, although it had been going on since the 80’s.

    Like

    • You do know, Moe, that 21 million jobs created in 8 years barely exceeds US working age population growth for the same time period?

      That being said, I was speaking of the long term effects of the policies that allowed for 4% unemployment, which included a considerable expansion of people on the government payroll.

      Like

      • I always wonder why ‘people on gov’t payroll’ merits a ‘but’.

        They’re consumers. They buy goods and services. They pay taxes. When they buy a car, Ford has to make another one. When they go to the movies, Viacom can pay its people. That’s what jobs do – they keep supply and demand going. How does it matter who they work for? They hold real jobs, they do real work, much of which we need done..

        Like

        • Two reasons, Moe:

          1 – They take tax money to support, so every increase in their numbers increases the taxes needed or the deficit.

          2 – They’re not an indicator of a strong or growing economy. Indeed, they’re normally signs of a faltering and shrinking economy when their numbers as a percentage of the workforce start to rise.

          Like

          • 1 – and businesses take my money too when they provide me a service and I pay a tax on top. Increases in numbers of employees in govt also increases revenue (their taxes), also incresees demand ion the private sector (more desks dammit!) and more revenue into govt is one big part of reducing hte deficit.
            2 – I’ve never seen evidence that they’re an indication of a shrinking economy. The economy grew during hte clinton years when size of govt went down and the economy grew duirng hte Bush years when the size of govt went up. In the first, we were also reducitng the deficit and in the second we were increasing it. That’s our recent history – what does it prove?

            Like

            • Actually, Moe, the US economy has been in a steady decline for at least 30 years. Don’t let the raw GNP or the politicians trying to get or keep a job fool you or blame it solely on the “1%.”

              There’s little enough money to be made except by investing in money, as it were, in some sort of autophagic financial nightmare. In other words, their money in the financial sector because it has access to the world but little of in anything that purely domestic in nature because America no longer produces much wealth.

              What we’ve done instead is make the “Spanish Mistake” of thinking of money, as in currency, as wealth.

              Like

              • Still, how are numbers of govt employees evidence of a shrinking economy? I know for sure that wages have been shrinking for 30 years, but we’re hardly restricted to fed govt for info on the GNP or the economy.

                Like

                • No, Moe; I didn’t mean politicians as the source for GNP data. i meant them as separate sources, neither of which provides an accurate picture of the health of the economy.

                  On Govt Payroll – Increases in government payrolls tend to mean one of two things (or both) – a decrease in the private sector’s capability to provide a service or an increase in the number of people needing a “traditional” government service.

                  Alternatively, they can also be an indicator of a manufactured need specifically designed by the government to employ the otherwise unemployed. This would be an indirect indicator of an economic downturn.

                  A perfect example of that would be Egypt. At the time of the Arab Spring they’d reached the point of 30%+ of the jobs being government jobs, largely because the government kept expanding its rolls to cover the decline they were experiencing.

                  As a further alternative indicator one can look at it as every increase in government payroll needs a job to do and this often results in further regulation and red tape that hampers private sector growth.

                  …But these are indicators, not hard and fast causal factors. That’s all I claimed.

                  Like

  3. I shall add him also…..

    Like

  4. Speaking of Gov Romney, I see he is now taking credit for the success of US automakers.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s