Nobel Winning Economist Can't Get a Job at Federal Reserve

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Bah....the Republicans will do whatever they can to logjam the Federal Government. ** the economy and the millions of Americans out of work - we just want to be back in power.

You all just want to stack the deck with correct thinking elitist scum before the gig is up.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

You all just want to stack the deck with correct thinking elitist scum before the gig is up.

...or just maybe some people really want to us to work toward a better tomorrow. Of course, if you're coming from the mindset that the government can't be part of the equation then you'll be cynical. What do you suppose the Republicans are going to do if they gain a majority in Congress this November? Absolutely nothing...which is what many of them intend to keep on doing. The more ineffective they can make government, the more they can keep pimping their laissez-faire economic policies on to the American people.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

...or just maybe some people really want to us to work toward a better tomorrow. Of course, if you're coming from the mindset that the government can't be part of the equation then you'll be cynical. What do you suppose the Republicans are going to do if they gain a majority in Congress this November? Absolutely nothing...which is what many of them intend to keep on doing. The more ineffective they can make government, the more they can keep pimping their laissez-faire economic policies on to the American people.

I want to work for a better tomorrow. The liberals have been in power since 2006. Since then the unemployment rate has gone from 5% to 10%. The national debt has doubled. It is time to stop listening to the liberal economists and go back to a conservative way of doing things. And before you say it, Bush didn't follow conservative economics. I have a feeling the new crop of conservatives that are about to be swept into power will however.

[Dan J 277]

I want to work for a better tomorrow. The liberals have been in power since 2006. Since then the unemployment rate has gone from 5% to 10%. The national debt has doubled. It is time to stop listening to the liberal economists and go back to a conservative way of doing things. And before you say it, Bush didn't follow conservative economics. I have a feeling the new crop of conservatives that are about to be swept into power will however.

You know its really hard to stop a speeding train. The factors that lead to the current recession was set in motion long before 2006. The housing bubble, which was a huge contributor actually peaked in 2005.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I want to work for a better tomorrow. The liberals have been in power since 2006. Since then the unemployment rate has gone from 5% to 10%. The national debt has doubled. It is time to stop listening to the liberal economists and go back to a conservative way of doing things. And before you say it, Bush didn't follow conservative economics. I have a feeling the new crop of conservatives that are about to be swept into power will however.

If the Right's answer is that government needs to step out of the way and people like you follow that prescription then you've learned nothing from the failed policies of the Bush Administration. From the diminished FDA to the deregulated financial industry, Laissez-faire ideals have left this country in ruin.

Edited October 12, 2010 by El Buscador

[JohnSmith2007 353]

If the Right's answer is that government needs to step out of the way and people like you follow that prescription then you've learned nothing from the failed policies of the Bush Administration. From the diminished FDA to the deregulated financial industry, Laissez-faire ideals have left this country in ruin.

No, spending like a drunken sailor has left this country in ruin. In the last two years this administration has ran up a debt so large our great, great, great grandchildren will be damning us for it. After the intense attention this congress has given the economy some laissez-faire ideals sound really good, after that is, the next congress undo's as much of it as they can.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

No, spending like a drunken sailor has left this country in ruin. In the last two years this administration has ran up a debt so large our great, great, great grandchildren will be damning us for it. After the intense attention this congress has given the economy some laissez-faire ideals sound really good, after that is, the next congress undo's as much of it as they can.

There you go - ignoring the aftermath that 8 years of failed Bush policies left this country in ruin. You didn't give a sh!t about the spending under Bush, so all the fearmongering aimed at the stimulus spending that staved off (yes, really) another Depression is disingenuous.

Here's some sobering facts:

1. The government is weighed down by its huge debt load.

For right now at least, this is actually very far from the truth. On average, from 1989 to 2009, the government paid total annual interest equal to roughly 3.8% of total U.S.

gross domestic product

. In 2009, interest came to 2.7% of GDP. Government debt has ballooned, but currently people are willing to lend to Uncle Sam at

very

low rates.

2. When interest rates rise, the government is in big trouble.

As I highlighted in the point above, low

interest rates

are helping the government deal with its massive debt load now, so rising rates certainly wouldn't help matters. However, there are a couple of things to consider here.

First off, the government's interest payments may continue to come down even if rates stay put or go up slightly. In the coming months (and years), the Treasury will roll over debt taken out years ago when rates were still higher. In mid-August, for instance, $22 billion of 10-year notes that were paying 5.75% will come due. Currently, 10-year notes are yielding just 3.07%.

Also, most of the marketable government debt is in Treasury notes. As of June 30, the weighted average yield on the Treasury notes outstanding was 2.6%, while the weighted average maturity was 3.6 years out. So it'll be pretty tough for higher rates to sneak up on the government all at once.

3. This level of debt is unprecedented.

If you amend that to say "in the post World War II era," then yes, that is correct. Debt as a percentage of GDP was 83.5% at the end of 2009, a level not seen since we were paying off the debt incurred during the Second World War.

I wholeheartedly agree with debt hawks that we should focus on bringing debt down to a reasonable level. What I don't agree with is the idea that that will imperil economic growth. In 1946, debt was 121% of GDP, and 20 years later it was down to 34%. During that two-decade stretch, U.S. GDP expanded 721%, or roughly 11% per year.

Will we repeat that performance? Probably not, but it does suggest that growth can occur while bringing debt under control.

4. We're going to get crushed by taxes.

We are going to see higher taxes down the road, but a big part of the reason taxes will increase is that we've been paying less than usual over the past few years. In 2009, total current tax receipts were 17% of GDP. Over the past 20 years, that number has averaged 20%.

5. The economy is being propped up by federal government spending

.

There's some truth here, considering the fact that federal government spending as a percentage of total GDP has risen significantly over the past few years -- to 8% in 2009 from 6.9% in 2007. However, 2009's level isn't too far above the 7.2% average of the past 20 years and it's notably below the 9.4% average between 1981 and 1989 (the Ronald Reagan years, if I'm not mistaken).

link

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

There you go - ignoring the aftermath that 8 years of failed Bush policies left this country in ruin. You didn't give a sh!t about the spending under Bush, so all the fearmongering aimed at the stimulus spending that staved off (yes, really) another Depression is disingenuous.

Here's some sobering facts:

1. The government is weighed down by its huge debt load.

For right now at least, this is actually very far from the truth. On average, from 1989 to 2009, the government paid total annual interest equal to roughly 3.8% of total U.S.

gross domestic product

. In 2009, interest came to 2.7% of GDP. Government debt has ballooned, but currently people are willing to lend to Uncle Sam at

very

low rates.

2. When interest rates rise, the government is in big trouble.

As I highlighted in the point above, low

interest rates

are helping the government deal with its massive debt load now, so rising rates certainly wouldn't help matters. However, there are a couple of things to consider here.

First off, the government's interest payments may continue to come down even if rates stay put or go up slightly. In the coming months (and years), the Treasury will roll over debt taken out years ago when rates were still higher. In mid-August, for instance, $22 billion of 10-year notes that were paying 5.75% will come due. Currently, 10-year notes are yielding just 3.07%.

Also, most of the marketable government debt is in Treasury notes. As of June 30, the weighted average yield on the Treasury notes outstanding was 2.6%, while the weighted average maturity was 3.6 years out. So it'll be pretty tough for higher rates to sneak up on the government all at once.

3. This level of debt is unprecedented.

If you amend that to say "in the post World War II era," then yes, that is correct. Debt as a percentage of GDP was 83.5% at the end of 2009, a level not seen since we were paying off the debt incurred during the Second World War.

I wholeheartedly agree with debt hawks that we should focus on bringing debt down to a reasonable level. What I don't agree with is the idea that that will imperil economic growth. In 1946, debt was 121% of GDP, and 20 years later it was down to 34%. During that two-decade stretch, U.S. GDP expanded 721%, or roughly 11% per year.

Will we repeat that performance? Probably not, but it does suggest that growth can occur while bringing debt under control.

4. We're going to get crushed by taxes.

We are going to see higher taxes down the road, but a big part of the reason taxes will increase is that we've been paying less than usual over the past few years. In 2009, total current tax receipts were 17% of GDP. Over the past 20 years, that number has averaged 20%.

5. The economy is being propped up by federal government spending

.

There's some truth here, considering the fact that federal government spending as a percentage of total GDP has risen significantly over the past few years -- to 8% in 2009 from 6.9% in 2007. However, 2009's level isn't too far above the 7.2% average of the past 20 years and it's notably below the 9.4% average between 1981 and 1989 (the Ronald Reagan years, if I'm not mistaken).

link

Bush is not running for anything this time, but all the folks that brought us the disastrous last two years are. Doesn't the Literati get it? Most folks don't trust politicians and "experts" any farther than they can throw them. Local government works best without the distant overlords, in state capitals, Washington D.C., or the Hague.

[Wayne and Claudia 40]

Bah....the Republicans will do whatever they can to logjam the Federal Government. ** the economy and the millions of Americans out of work - we just want to be back in power.

Wish I could permanently logjam DC...logjams there frees up the clean, flowing rivers of Capitalism everywhere else.

[Ban Hammer 13,514]

There you go - ignoring the aftermath that 8 years of failed Bush policies left this country in ruin. You didn't give a sh!t about the spending under Bush, so all the fearmongering aimed at the stimulus spending that staved off (yes, really) another Depression is disingenuous.

Here's some sobering facts:

1. The government is weighed down by its huge debt load.

For right now at least, this is actually very far from the truth. On average, from 1989 to 2009, the government paid total annual interest equal to roughly 3.8% of total U.S.

gross domestic product

. In 2009, interest came to 2.7% of GDP. Government debt has ballooned, but currently people are willing to lend to Uncle Sam at

very

low rates.

2. When interest rates rise, the government is in big trouble.

As I highlighted in the point above, low

interest rates

are helping the government deal with its massive debt load now, so rising rates certainly wouldn't help matters. However, there are a couple of things to consider here.

First off, the government's interest payments may continue to come down even if rates stay put or go up slightly. In the coming months (and years), the Treasury will roll over debt taken out years ago when rates were still higher. In mid-August, for instance, $22 billion of 10-year notes that were paying 5.75% will come due. Currently, 10-year notes are yielding just 3.07%.

Also, most of the marketable government debt is in Treasury notes. As of June 30, the weighted average yield on the Treasury notes outstanding was 2.6%, while the weighted average maturity was 3.6 years out. So it'll be pretty tough for higher rates to sneak up on the government all at once.

3. This level of debt is unprecedented.

If you amend that to say "in the post World War II era," then yes, that is correct. Debt as a percentage of GDP was 83.5% at the end of 2009, a level not seen since we were paying off the debt incurred during the Second World War.

I wholeheartedly agree with debt hawks that we should focus on bringing debt down to a reasonable level. What I don't agree with is the idea that that will imperil economic growth. In 1946, debt was 121% of GDP, and 20 years later it was down to 34%. During that two-decade stretch, U.S. GDP expanded 721%, or roughly 11% per year.

Will we repeat that performance? Probably not, but it does suggest that growth can occur while bringing debt under control.

4. We're going to get crushed by taxes.

We are going to see higher taxes down the road, but a big part of the reason taxes will increase is that we've been paying less than usual over the past few years. In 2009, total current tax receipts were 17% of GDP. Over the past 20 years, that number has averaged 20%.

5. The economy is being propped up by federal government spending

.

There's some truth here, considering the fact that federal government spending as a percentage of total GDP has risen significantly over the past few years -- to 8% in 2009 from 6.9% in 2007. However, 2009's level isn't too far above the 7.2% average of the past 20 years and it's notably below the 9.4% average between 1981 and 1989 (the Ronald Reagan years, if I'm not mistaken).

link

so when are you gonna tell those "sobering facts" to obama, particularly 1, 3, 4, and 5?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

so when are you gonna tell those "sobering facts" to obama, particularly 1, 3, 4, and 5?

Steven thinks they are fairy tales told to Republicans to scare them away from the Church of Obama.

[Wayne and Claudia 40]

Stay home, drink kool-aid, smoke dope and it's all paid for by taxpayers? Jaja, for many it's perfect. These people are lazy and priviledged. Unemployment has become the wicked step-sister of social security.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

We have another RWN parrot for this forum.

[Heracles 417]

No, spending like a drunken sailor has left this country in ruin. In the last two years this administration has ran up a debt so large our great, great, great grandchildren will be damning us for it. After the intense attention this congress has given the economy some laissez-faire ideals sound really good, after that is, the next congress undo's as much of it as they can.

What about the two unfunded wars? Do you think this $1 trillion plus cost reduced the debt? What about the $1 trillion spent [on top of that] on the military every single year?

laissez-faire... Have you been in a coma for the last three years? laissez-faire is exactly what caused this mess and most other such messes in America's history. The lack of laissez-faire is why various countries neither have as frequent recessions nor are they struggling now.

This rubbish against government spending is the biggest bullcrap I've heard in a long time. If it was not BS, then the countries who spend much more than the US would be bankrupt, instead of doing better than you. It would be the average Joe's in Peoria able to purchase 5 homes with the sale of their one homes, than it being the other away around.

[Ban Hammer 13,514]

We have another RWN parrot for this forum.

stooping to insults now?