Flutterby™! : The New Economy

Next unread comment / Catchup all unread comments User Account Info | Logout | XML/Pilot/etc versions | Long version (with comments) | Weblog archives | Site Map | | Browse Topics

The New Economy

2011-03-16 14:32:42.099693+00 by Dan Lyke 2 comments

One New York Times lifestyle piece is neither a trend nor a statistically valid sample, but: Ohio Town Sees Public Job as Only Route to Middle Class. Remember when we were going to be a service economy, and all get rich doing each other's laundry and serving each other dinner?

[ related topics: Invention and Design Heinlein New York Economics ]

comments in descending chronological order (reverse):

#Comment Re: made: 2011-03-17 17:22:22.663766+00 by: ebradway

I think these speaks volumes to the confusion in modern politics. The GOP gives huge breaks to the wealthy but gets strong support from the poor. The Democrats give breaks and entitlements to the poor but have strong support among the elite rich. Neither party speaks clearly for rich or poor. The divide is greater if you compare conservatives with liberals.

I think there is a trend among Americans to feel that government lacks self control. And by "trend among Americans", I mean the Wal-mart shopping, NFL/NASCAR watching, majority. What seems to be happening is that Americans are projecting their own lack of self control onto the government:

"I'm broke and in foreclosure because I'm too stupid to manage my money well. The government is broke too. They must be too stupid to manage my tax money."

It has a nice ring for many Americans. The GOP and Tea Baggers shouting "Government spending is OUT OF CONTROL!" make it seem like the Democrats in Congress are a bunch of frat boys and sorority girls at Spring Break.

I think Dan has linked to graphics in the past that demonstrate the Democrats have always been more fiscally responsible. Sure, they like to spend money on things like buses and education but they do a better job of either aligning with a growth economy or managing taxation to pay for what they are doing. The GOP has a bad habit of blowing trillions of dollars on meaningless "wars" (drugs, Iraq, etc) while reducing the tax base to pay for it.

I wonder if the problem is that the GOP views spending on "wars" like the spending the Government did during World War II. Towards the end of a depression, we managed to spend record percentages of GDP bombing Japan and Germany into the stone age. And somehow, the economy was bolstered by this action. I seriously don't understand the economics behind the success of World War II.

So the GOP continues to search for a new WWII to pour money into. They dump money into the black hole of the Defense Department budget. That budget is not managed the same as other Government budgets. So it's impossible to account for it all. Government accounting is brutal in the civilian side. The GAO tries to track every penny spent. That level of accountability just doesn't happen with the DoD budget.

I would have more respect for the Tea Baggers if they simply came out and said "we need to cut the entire Federal Budget by X% across the board: Social Secuity, Medicare, DoD and entitlements". Instead, they try to make up the difference by just cutting entitlement spending - the part with the best accounting. So, in the end, the DoD gets to keep operating as usual.

And yes, I'm sick and tired of both Liberal and Conservatives who harp on about how hard it is to get by on $250,000 a year. F'ing bullsh*t! You guys need to spend a year living in a van, down by the river. Then you'll realize that $63K is a damned good income and that most people make less than that!

#Comment Re: made: 2011-03-17 02:17:57.645333+00 by: Dan Lyke

The National Review responds:

Here’s a comparison that New York liberals might understand better: If you look at Charleston, W.V. (which is close to Gallipolis), and adjust for cost of living, $63,000 is the equivalent of $147,000 in Manhattan, $123,000 in Brooklyn, and $108,000 in Queen