288,000 Jobs Created, Unemployment Drops to 6.1%, & The Dow approaches 17,000

[Option D]

But Beach.

Why do we spend more than we take in? Why the spike in spending? What took place to warrent such spending? What is the tax climate that results in less money? Shit didnt just happen out of thin air. Those that look at politics in that light, and are extremely inconsistant in their outrage and concern...disgust me

[2Thick]

unemployment is lower, the stock market is way better, the auto industry is better, you guys just overtook saudi arabia as numero uno for oil production. Your nation is in a better place.

Explain to me what Obama has to do with the stock market being higher? How do you give him credit for that? Ditto for oil and gas on private lands. In fact, I remember him actually shutting down offshore drilling for a while.

Have you seen the problems GM is having? The only thing keeping their stock from diving and eventually going into the toilet again is the current significant US govt ownership in their stock. That's the only thing keeping shorts from driving it into the ground. Those few big hedge funds who still own it will probably turn around and short it back into being worthless - if not now, most likely in a couple of years when certain people are out of office. I'd wager that even more problems will have come out about GM by then. They're a perfect example of why things should be left to free markets rather than big govt interference. They should have been allowed to die, and had their assets auctioned off to better auto manufacturers.

[Dos Equis]

But Beach.

Why do we spend more than we take in? Why the spike in spending? What took place to warrent such spending? What is the tax climate that results in less money? Shit didnt just happen out of thin air. Those that look at politics in that light, and are extremely inconsistant in their outrage and concern...disgust me

We spend more than we take in because we're fiscally irresponsible.  We had a spike in spending because we elected an inexperienced, incompetent president who worked with an inept irresponsible Congress to explode our national debt.  

I don't know what you mean by "tax climate that results in less money"?  

You are disgusted with people who express inconsistent views?  Seems like misplaced outrage.  You ought to be outraged by the people in DC who continually waste hard earned taxpayer money.  

[Necrosis]

The answer by syntaxmachine pretty much says what I would say. I don't think that things are as rosy as you make them out to be - or as bleak as headhuntersix makes them out to be. Some things are better that much is true; but many things are worse.

No data can rebut my point, being in a recession and now recovered for all intensive purposes indicates improvement, regardless of the causal agent.  The economy is slightly better, I think that is the most accurate generalized statement one could make.

[flipper5470]

Intensive purposes?  Your point is mute.....

</sarc>

[Necrosis]

yes intents and purposes. I wrote fucking haz like ten times in the last page. Got me.

intensive, worser, grammer.

[flipper5470]

 

[Option D]

We spend more than we take in because we're fiscally irresponsible.  We had a spike in spending because we elected an inexperienced, incompetent president who worked with an inept irresponsible Congress to explode our national debt.  

I don't know what you mean by "tax climate that results in less money"?  

You are disgusted with people who express inconsistent views?  Seems like misplaced outrage.  You ought to be outraged by the people in DC who continually waste hard earned taxpayer money.  

that didnt answer anything.

but ok... if thats what you think, so be it, who am i to try to actually do root cause analysis. Silly me.
God forbid "we spent a lot because this happened and that happened"...na.. its "we spent a lot because the negro is a retard"... gotcha

[Dos Equis]

that didnt answer anything.

but ok... if thats what you think, so be it, who am i to try to actually do root cause analysis. Silly me.
God forbid "we spent a lot because this happened and that happened"...na.. its "we spent a lot because the negro is a retard"... gotcha

Did you read my response?

You asked:  "Why do we spend more than we take in?"  I responded:  "We spend more than we take in because we're fiscally irresponsible."

You asked:  "Why the spike in spending?"  I responded:  "We had a spike in spending because we elected an inexperienced, incompetent president who worked with an inept irresponsible Congress to explode our national debt."

You asked:  "What is the tax climate that results in less money?"  I responded:  "I don't know what you mean by 'tax climate that results in less money'?"

The quotes in your last post are what is retarded.  Certainly didn't come from me. 

If you want "root cause analysis," ask GigantorX.  He's a lot more well versed in specific economic indicators than me.  My approach is a lot simpler. 

But I don't get the impression you really want a discussion about this anyway.  You're more concerned with joining the Soul Crusher groupies/stalkers and finding hypocrisy (which has zero to do with any kind of root cause analysis).   

[Option D]

Did you read my response?

You asked:  "Why do we spend more than we take in?"  I responded:  "We spend more than we take in because we're fiscally irresponsible."

You asked:  "Why the spike in spending?"  I responded:  "We had a spike in spending because we elected an inexperienced, incompetent president who worked with an inept irresponsible Congress to explode our national debt."

You asked:  "What is the tax climate that results in less money?"  I responded:  "I don't know what you mean by 'tax climate that results in less money'?"

The quotes in your last post are what is retarded.  Certainly didn't come from me. 

If you want "root cause analysis," ask GigantorX.  He's a lot more well versed in specific economic indicators than me.  My approach is a lot simpler. 

But I don't get the impression you really want a discussion about this anyway.  You're more concerned with joining the Soul Crusher groupies/stalkers and finding hypocrisy (which has zero to do with any kind of root cause analysis).   

no.. .i seriously thought there was going to be something like "oh well spending went up because of stim bill or something else that happened and spending was the choice of action taken, but instead of spending, we should have don x y or z"...

Thats the response i thought i was going to get. But to blame it on a thought pattern or mental defect was kind of a cop out and gets us no where.

And regarding 3333, i dont even read his posts or comment on them as he has lost every ounce of credibilty with me. You, gigantor x were the only level headed guys that kind of actually didnt go off the edge with the hyperbole and talking points. Coach, 3333 and some of the others make posts that i dont acknowledge and any way shape or form. Your assessment of my motives for posting in the political board is off base. I asked questions about events, not thought processes

[Option D]

when i say "current tax climate" im referring to "who pays what at what rate as compared to times when we were doing better or worse"

[Dos Equis]

no.. .i seriously thought there was going to be something like "oh well spending went up because of stim bill or something else that happened and spending was the choice of action taken, but instead of spending, we should have don x y or z"...

Thats the response i thought i was going to get. But to blame it on a thought pattern or mental defect was kind of a cop out and gets us no where.

And regarding 3333, i dont even read his posts or comment on them as he has lost every ounce of credibilty with me. You, gigantor x were the only level headed guys that kind of actually didnt go off the edge with the hyperbole and talking points. Coach, 3333 and some of the others make posts that i dont acknowledge and any way shape or form. Your assessment of my motives for posting in the political board is off base. I asked questions about events, not thought processes

Ok.  No worries.  Not sure we were on the same page.  I didn't say anything about a mental defect.  I was talking about conduct (fiscal irresponsibility).  From my simplistic view, the root cause of our economic crisis is the failure to live within our means.  We spend more than we take in.  It doesn't really matter to me why we do it.  There is no justification for a $17 trillion debt.  And this chronic overspending is a problem that affects both parties. 

[Soul Crusher]

when i say "current tax climate" im referring to "who pays what at what rate as compared to times when we were doing better or worse"

wwwhhaaaaaaa - you voted for this disaster 2x over - own it

[Dos Equis]

when i say "current tax climate" im referring to "who pays what at what rate as compared to times when we were doing better or worse"

Man don't even get me started on taxes.  Our tax system is twisted.  Those of us who pay, pay too much.  Higher income earners also pay a disproportionate share.  Too many people don't have skin in the game.

I'm a believer in the flat tax.  Fairest way to go IMO.  And overall, we need to give government less taxpayer money.  

[Option D]

Man don't even get me started on taxes.  Our tax system is twisted.  Those of us who pay, pay too much.  Higher income earners also pay a disproportionate share.  Too many people don't have skin in the game.

I'm a believer in the flat tax.  Fairest way to go IMO.  And overall, we need to give government less taxpayer money.  

i totally agree with that. The tax shit is insane. As well as entitlements that are paid with tax money.

[Soul Crusher]

i totally agree with that. The tax shit is insane. As well as entitlements that are paid with tax money.

All while fagbama is at a fundraiser in Texas and not on the border while thousands flood the nation for free shit 

[RRKore]

Intensive purposes?  Your point is mute.....

</sarc>

Man, doggy dog world around here, right?  lol

[syntaxmachine]

simple linear regression to eliminate such extraneous variables. However,the underlying trend as you indicate (you only truly touched on jobs, there are far more markers of progress in my eyes) shows an mild improvement and low term data which is less cyclical (as you know stats of this nature probably utilize a lower alpha level to achieve significance) chance and fluctuation exist in small part. With a nebulous complex dynamic systems I think more attention to long term trends is important. I think this harps back to avxo's point of normal cycling of these variables.

I also think the job market numbers are large part due to automation and education. Jobs are scarce, require more education and then more debt. I am not sure how much impact improving economies will be as automation continues to grow. The job issue is epiphenominal.

I don't see any major points of disagreement here, though I have no clue how much automation and education are contributing to current labor market conditions. This paper discusses the decline in global labor share of income around the world and argues that the largest contributor is technological advancement, while this Oxford study indicates that almost half of jobs in the US are vulnerable to computerization. But it's above my paygrade to evaluate such papers' methodologies -- I'm too dumb.

It is scary stuff if true though, and maybe indicative of the dangers of maximizing economic efficiency: perhaps we should constrain that maximization if it means a huge, permanently unemployed class of citizens in the future.

[avxo]

It is scary stuff if true though, and maybe indicative of the dangers of maximizing economic efficiency: perhaps we should constrain that maximization if it means a huge, permanently unemployed class of citizens in the future.

This actually raises a host of interesting questions. I'll have to read the two papers you link to when I have a free minute.

[syntaxmachine]

This actually raises a host of interesting questions. I'll have to read the two papers you link to when I have a free minute.

http://singularityhub.com/2013/01/22/robot-serves-up-340-hamburgers-per-hour/