Posted on 12/07/2010 6:06:56 AM PST by JohnRLott
Neither government spending nor tax cuts automatically provide an economic stimulus. But President Obama has continued to make this mistake. Take a look at much of what he insisted be included in his tax cut deal with congressional Republicans.
So what makes the economic pie bigger? There are two sides to this. The supply side: lower marginal tax rates mean the more that people get to keep from each additional dollar that they earn, the harder that they will work and the more that they will produce.
The other view, the Keynesian view, also often called "the demand side view" or "the multiplier," is that giving the money to the right people to spend which will create wealth. Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made this claim earlier this year when she advocated more unemployment insurance benefits: "it injects demand into the economy and is job creating. It creates jobs faster than almost any other initiative you can name. Because again it is money that is needed for families to survive and it is spent."
We see this line of reasoning in the proposed 13-month extension of unemployment insurance benefits to continue paying out benefits for up to 99 weeks.
It is also the basis for the president's proposed expansion of the earn income tax credit and items such as the college-tuition tax credit for relatively lower-income families. . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
rhetorical question
I think we could fill the navel of a flea with what he understands, and STILL have room for a Hummer!!
No. He’s an economic moron.
*that should be efficient enough, I’m thinking*
He knows the golden rule.
Those with the gold make the rule.
Obviously not, but he's far too arrogant to realize how ignorant he is. He's had so many people kissing his backside and telling him he's the chosen one and can do no wrong for so long he's come to believe it. (Although I suspect he believed it long ago.)
I love it when the substanative questions of which the media needed to ask and report, become actionable and newsworthy two years after the election.
If the total amount of his understanding and knowledge of economics where shoved up the rear end of an ant it would roll around like a B-B in a box car.
Otherwise, he doesn't know JACK SH*T.
Yeah, like Gold-man-Sachs......
Good read this morning John, and I like your explanation about changing who is spending the money as opposed to really stimulating the economy.
On the same note, what do you think about Bernacke’s statement yesterday that the Federal Reserve isn’t printing money? The cash has to come from someplace, so if the Fed isn’t printing it, just where is it coming from??
Kippis!
(stupid libs: "NO! He was born in Hawaii!")
I’m watching RAT liars on TV and they keep repeating that either they or wealthy people that they know didn’t want a tax break and that they could afford to pay more taxes.
EVERY SINGLE TIME THEY REPEAT THAT BALONEY, THE RESPONSE SHOULD BE: “OK, JUST CUT A CHECK TO THE US TREASURY FOR WHAT YOU THINK YOU SHOULD BE PAYING! DON’T TAKE THE LOWER RATE! PAY MORE! NO ONE IF FORCING YOU TO KEEP THE MONEY!”
Obama understands economics just fine. The error is in assuming that economic prosperity is his goal.
0 is just the face of the machine.
“The problem with liberals is not that they are ignorant, it is that so much of what they know isn't so.”
If by “understand the economy” you mean, “studied socialist dogma” - well then yes 0bama is well versed.
It’s been made abundantly clear over the past two years that Obama doesn’t understand anything, and in future will be very lucky to hold down the job of men’s room attendant at a mid-level hotel washroom.
Obama...doesn’t care about the “rules” that make America.
Everybody-right and left, keeps being presumptious about what he will do, should do or could do.
His very strength politically, is his disregard of the traditions of American politics. His opponents call him “dumb” and “Obozo” because of his apparent lack of knowledge and understanding of American political tradition.
Truth be told..because he is so ignorant and disregarding of American political tradition, he is very, very dangerous. He demonstrates a studied disregard of convention and tradition that the Rinicratic Oligarchy can’t see or won’t admit to. Consequently he is beyond their control.
In this he demonstrates his true roots as a Marxist/Leninist..which the leading American Political Elite are incapable of identifying, let alone deal with intelligently and constructively.
He has ammassed, so far, more power to DC than the combination of Lincoln, Wilson, FDR and Johnson-at considerable expense to Flyover Country.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.