“Fixing” the Economy, Eh?
It looks like the current Administration really is doing a great job of “fixing” the US economy.
In January 2013, disposable inflation income – adjusted for inflation – dropped 4%. For those who’ve forgotten: disposable income is what you have left after taxes and other mandatory deductions.
That’s the largest single-month drop since 1959 – or in at least 54 years. I say “at least” because 1959 is when the statistics for monthly changes in inflation-adjusted disposable income begin.
Consumers spent a bit more in January 2013, even while having 4% less to spend. What that means is that consumers are saving less or going further in debt. Neither is a good thing for the economy’s long-term health.
Other indicators, except for inflation, were similarly bad. Inflation was about the sole bright spot – 1.3% for the Jan 2012-Jan 2013 period. However, even that low level of inflation hurts when disposable incomes are shrinking.
And in case you were wondering – yeah, the new taxes which kicked in at the beginning of the year were the primary cause of the drop in disposable income.
Oh, by the way: that 1.3% inflation (Jan 2012 to Jan 2013) does not include the recent spike in gasoline prices. That price spike happened largely in Feb 2013. On January 28, 2013, the national average price of regular-grade gasoline was $3.296/gallon. On February 25, 2013 – $3.722/gallon – an increase of $0.426/gallon, or over 12.9%, in less than a month.
On another “cheery” note – under the current administration, the Federal government has now added $6+ trillion in new debt – in 4 years and 40 days. That’s “trillion” with a “T”, or
$6,000,000,000,000.00+
That’s an average of not quite $1.5 trillion in new Federal debt added during each of the past four years.
The words of Pyrrhus of Epirus come to mind: “Another such ‘victory’ and we shall be utterly ruined.”
Category: Economy
When he was running against Bush… Bush wasn’t running, but, that is who Obama ran against, adding THREE trillion to the debt in 8 years was UNPATRIOTIC.
It’s crazy up here in Maine. I was hoping to buy a car this year, but it looks like that isn’t going to happen. Because of inflation and a stagnant income stream, I can afford to make the payments, I just can’t afford to drive it or insure it.
I live in Maine and can’t afford to buy fresh fish, FFS.
If it wasn’t for ebay, I dunno where we’d be, and now the MF’s in government want to tax THAT too. It’s bad enough I have to declare that income on the taxes, but if internet sales taxes take ahold, it will definitely screw the economy big time. I can’t tell you how many folks I know here who depend upon the few tax dollars saved to be able to buy a few things to get by.
Ah well, you guys and gals have heard it all before. We’re all in the same boat. But damn, for once I’d like to just be able to feel comfortable about my kid’s futures. With the current administration and their sycophants in the press, it just seems like 1933 all over again.
And these states are the worst places to be in residence, in regard to taxes:
http://money.msn.com/taxes/c_galleryregular.aspx?cp-documentid=250574718>1=33029
Yes, good ol’ New York is right at the top.
Illinois has raised its state income tax from 3% to 5%. Incompetent managements in all states do not seem to understand the term ‘economy of scale’. As long as it’s your money, they want it so that they can spend it and far too much of it goes to the pork barrel.
Here’s a conundrum for you. Your tax dollars are going into increased funding in Head Start, a Johnson-era program that was started with the best intentions, but has not shown the hoped-for results, which fade by the time HS students reach the 3rd to 4th grades:
http://www.timesdispatch.com/news/faith-healing/article_b9184ada-95f2-5bf2-9bf7-331bf60193f4.html
Now, pre-school, particularly in Head Start, is being mandated, which makes it more expensive than ever, never mind the lack of benefits.
http://royaloak.patch.com/blog_posts/mandated-pre-school-is-dictatorship-whether-local-or-national
And guess what? Even if you don’t have kids, you still get to pay for it through the tax increases. And it is not necessarily the best thing for very young kids.
http://www.universalpreschool.com/faq/
And this is Bloomerbutt’s legacy for New York City:
http://www.schoolbook.org/2013/02/28/calling-all-five-year-olds-for-kindergarten/
Consumers spent a bit more in January 2013, even while having 4% less to spend. What that means is that consumers are saving less or going further in debt.
Mainly because of that non-existent inflation which has increased my gas bill 15 percent in one MONTH, or over 100 percent over the last 4 years, and increased my food bill God-knows how much in the last year. Think back to when hamburger was $2/lb, and now you’re lucky to see it under $3/lb unless you’re buying fat with a little meat in it.
Certainly, we are in the best of hands. Sure glad that elite Ivy League leadership is in charge of us ignorant semi-washed masses.
[…] This ain’t Hell… wonders about fixing the economy […]
Well I guess for Obama it’ go big or go home. I mean its not like it’s real money or anything…….
Another four years without a budget, perhaps?
People are using that 4% less disposable income to buy guns!!
Bill R: that’s 4% less money before they buy a firearm (or anything else) when compared to Dec 2012, amigo.
Kind of “left out” the fact that the decrease in spending came from the cut off of the payroll tax that Obama wanted to keep and the Repukes insisted on getting rid of and not the taxes for the wealthy, didn’t you Hondo?
From your own article:
—————————————————-
Consumer spending in the U.S. rose in January even as incomes dropped by the most in 20 years, showing households were weathering the payroll-tax increase by socking away less money in the bank.
—————————————————-
And that 6 trillion, that’s trillion with a T, comes almost entirely from Republican policies and the Republican great depression.
But nice try, skippy.
Sippy-boy: payroll taxes include income taxes and Medicare taxes also. New rates for some of those, too.
Republican policies my ass. Social security? Medicare? Medicaid? SNAP, AKA foodstamps? None of those were instituted during a Republican administration. And those four areas plus other entitlement programs managed by HHS now consume at least 47% of Federal spending (24% for HHS, 21% for Social Security, about 2% for SNAP). Defense now consumes around 20% of Federal spending – less than either Social Security OR
HHS.
It’s not defense or other Constitutionally-authorized spending that’s bankrupting this nation, Sippy-poo. It’s out of control expansion and continuation of unearned entitlement programs. “Bread and circuses” only works so long as the government can afford to buy the bread and put on the show. When the money runs out, it ain’t pretty.
Obama’s been in charge since Jan 2009. He’s failed to make things any better whatsoever. In fact, by all indicators things are far worse off today than they were in Jan 2009. We’re $6 trillion farther in debt as a nation, and a smaller fraction of the population has a job today than 4 years 1 mo ago. Just take a look at the US labor participation rate. Were it the same today as it was in Jan 2009, we’d be short approx 5 million more jobs than we are today, and U1 unemployment would be on the order of what U6 unemployment currently is: 14% or so.
Don’t believe me? Go look up the figures and do the math yourself – if you’re capable of doing so, that is. The math is simple, and the figures are available at the BLS website.
Once again, your DU “Kool Aid”-induced fog has caused you to wax ignorant. Try again.
There are a couple of things in play here – maxims, if you will.
1. Money Is Boss. There’s more money and luxury items to be had not by working, but by voting. Here in America, the indigent drive Cadillacs just like the very rich. Why should anyone work their asses off for 40-50 years, drive a used Toyota, with a future filled with ramen and spam, when they can go on welfare, vote Dem and have steak and Escalades? Only suckers vote for altruistic principles.
2. To ask a question is to be guaranteed you’ll be accused of racism, sexism, homophobia and so on. Constructive criticism, even asking questions are corrective measures. The syncophants around this POTUS have removed any and all correctives from being known/reported, considered, and where applicable – applied. Like Woodward noted this week, Obama has become Nixon – he can do no wrong, and can’t accept any concept that opposes him. It’s never ‘just business,’ ever critique is intensely personal.
3. We have thousands of Federal laws. We have thousands more laws at the State and local level. For every law there are regulations and rules to clarify, define, and extend the law. We need, at the Federal level, no more than 100 laws. We’d have to shoot, sterilize, and exile all the lawyers, but I see that as a feature.
Hondo: I am aware of what the term disposable income means, even if you actually wrote disposable inflation. I just thought we needed a little truthful snark. We all (most of us) know the economy isn’t getting better, and it won’t as long as idiots keep voting for more “free stuff” from the government.
You’re the worst kind of ignorant, Hondo. You think you’re smart, and thus will never learn. Payroll taxes and income taxes are two different things. That’s how Republicans always get away with saying things like: “The rich pay 80% of the taxes” ete. They do that by leaving out payroll tax, which they regard as entitlements for the purpose of insulting the poor and middle class and taxes for paying for the unnecessary wars and tax cuts for the wealthy. In fact, Romney’s entire 47% rant- remember the one most of the folks on this board applauded?- was based on the notion that payroll taxes are not really taxes. Social security has been running and still runs at a surplus. If it weren’t for that, the Debt would be much worse. Medicare provides high quality care in a much more efficient manner than private health care. Gutting Medicare will not stop people from getting sick, or growing old it will just shift the cost burden to seniors who can least afford it, take away Medicare’s bargaining powers, while making some HMOs happy for some business. It will, of course, also reduce the quality of care for the elderly. Plus, President Obama has gone a long way to solve problems that exist with Medicare and is willing to address any problems with SS. He has already gone a long way to fixing the problems with Medicare with his Obamacare. From the trustee report: http://www.ssa.gov/oact/trsum/index.html ———————————————- Projected Medicare costs over 75 years are substantially lower than they otherwise would be because of provisions in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (the “Affordable Care Act” or ACA). ———————————————————— Most of the debt comes from the Bush tax cuts, the wars, and the economic downturn. The deficit has been going down under Obama. Yes, the Debt is Republicans fault. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/20/bush-tax-cuts-debt_n_864812.html Plus, President Obama has already agreed to make MORE changes to both SS and Medicare. He just wants Republicans to make good on closing the loopholes THEY campaigned on closing. The… Read more »
Oh, I had a spare minute and I answered your “find the evidence!” challenge on the Michelle Obama thread:
http://valorguardians.com/blog/?p=34334
Looking forward to watching you move the goal posts, as is your wont. And the main reason I don’t often respond to your silly challenges.
@14 – used Toyota, with a future filled with ramen and spam — your words.
What?
I may drive a used Ford, but it’s the car I chose. The Escalade gets stolen all the time – has a very high theft rate — and I have yet to find anything on the internet that supports your statement that the indigent are driving Cadillacs, anyway.
Ramen and spam? I’m retired. I’m on a penny-pinching budget like a lot of people but I know how to shop for good, healthy food — not junk food, just so you know — as do a lot of other people on this site. I have fresh produce every damned day. I see people shopping with Link cards, yes, but they are taking home good, healthy food, also. I also use coupons. I don’t know where the hell you get the idea that anyone in my state, or anyone else, for that matter, is living on ramen and spam. That’s a choice, not a have-to. Besides that, there are food pantries that also give food to anyone who needs it — no one is ever turned away — and it is not junk food or ramen or spam, either.
If you want to do something besides run your mouth and complain, you could contact the Society of St. Andrew and get into their gleaning weekends. They’ll send you their newsletter for nothing. Volunteers, for example, go to places like potato farms and pick up whatever the harvesting machines drop. These people have gleaned and bagged thousands of tons of fresh produce to feed low income families.
Here’s a link to the organization: http://www.endhunger.org/
And let’s get this straight: Barack Obama is NOT Richard Nixon. They are worlds apart in every possible way.
“Social security has been running and still runs at a surplus”
An accounting fiction. That you believe-and repeat-this pathetic and transparent lie tells me all I need to know about you sippy.
I’m sure you get all your news from “real” news sources, 68. The same ones that said Romney was going to win in a landslide.
CBS good enough for you?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8334-505146_162-57364896/5-social-security-myths-that-have-to-go/?pageNum=4
@14- There are plenty of lawless societies for you to choose from, Dave-O. I doubt if they are any places you want to visit, much less live.
That article is a lie, 68. The SS trust fund does not owe the treasury, the treasury owes the SS trust fund. If we are to use the metaphor of the “rich and cash strapped Daddy’s credit card” that the author used, the owner of that card is SS not the treasury. You don’t get to not pay the bill just because you decide it’s inconvenient.
BWAHAHAHAHA! If you choose to buy the fiction that one part of the government can borrow from another part, spend what it borrowed, put the IOUs into another account and call it a “surplus” go right ahead, the rest of us can see it for what it is.
It’s Republicans that use that SAME argument all the time, 68. You want to have it both ways but I’m not going to let you. Either these are entitlements, in which case you have to give the money back or they are taxes, in which case you have to stop declaring that those who don’t pay income taxes are moochers. Either way, it’s the Republicans that have been maintaining the fiction that payroll taxes aren’t taxes, not the Democrats.
Sippy-boy: you really don’t get it, do you? All social security taxes are is exactly that – Federal tax income. It has no tangible assets except for IOUs from the Federal government. That’s the same Federal government that has only managed to balance its books (e.g., managed a budget surplus) 3 or 4 times since the creation of the unified budget in 1969.
Bluntly: the so-called Social Security “trust fund” is not real, and isn’t “money in the bank”. It has already been spent by the Federal government on current operations; no significant tangible assets were purchased with those funds. The only way that previously-spent money will ever be replaced is from new Federal tax receipts, or from new Federal borrowing, in the future. As of today, it is gone – and will be until it the IOUs are redeemed with new Federal revenues.
And don’t try and claim that the “nasty Republicans” did this, either. According to the SSA itself, the so-called Social Security “trust fund” operates precisely the same way today as it did the day it was created in 1939; the rest of the Federal government has been “hitting it up” for a loan of unused money money since day 1. FDR was president in 1939, so blame him for allowing that practice to begin. It’s been standard practice ever since.
And don’t blame Nixon for bringing Social Security “on budget” in 1969, either. The creation of the “unified budged” in 1969 was the result of laws passed in 1968, when LBJ was president.
http://www.ssa.gov/history/InternetMyths2.html
There’s the difference-I’m talking about basic logic and math and you’re talking about politics. The fact remains that all there is of the “surplus” is a government accounting trick, that’s a fact even if it is politically inconvenient for those who have looted from taxpayers who were not given an option as to how to invest their retirement money.
If “Republicans” are saying that those who don’t pay taxes (however you figure that) are moochers-make your argument with them-I certainly have never said that. You’re also wrong about Social Security being an “entitlement”, if by that you mean that you are entitled to a benefit for what you have paid in over the years-the USSC has ruled that no such entitlement exist in Fleming v. Nestor.
Sippy: I also looked at your alleged “proof”. For once, in one case you actually have an arguable point. In the other – well, as usual you’re out to lunch. Regarding your the Ohio election, your claim that Jonn erred is IMO at least arguable (I would have phrased that differently than Jonn did). On the “gay discharge” claim – uh, no. You’re out to lunch there. Ever heard of nonverbal of symbolic speech? Public conduct is a form of expression. Indeed, conduct is often a form of nonverbal or symbolic speech. For examples, see public protest, marches, nonverbal illustrations, sit-ins, giving someone the finger, etc . . . . When the conduct in question is performed in a public forum or area, there is no expectation of privacy. Ergo, any act that conveys a message performed in a public area or forum is not only a form of symbolic or nonverbal speech, but is also a public expression of that same symbolic or nonverbal speech. The act in question here was no different than a heterosexual couple kissing under a streetlight on the corner. By doing so, that couple was declaring, publicly and with no expectation of privacy, that they are attracted to one another sexually. The declaration is symbolic vice verbal, but it’s nonetheless a form of public speech. The individuals in the case you cite engaged in conduct that, to a reasonable person, would strongly imply if not prove homosexuality (or at least bisexuality, which was also verboten under DADT). Doing so in public with no concern for who might observe them renders the act a public act of symbolic speech. In this case, the act is also a public declaration of homosexual orientation. Such public declaration was precisely what was banned under the “don’t tell” part of DADT. The fact that the act occurred off base and was observed and reported by civilians is irrelevant. The fact that the same conduct was observed by two different individuals indicates that it was performed where no expectation of privacy existed, and was thus public conduct. The mere fact… Read more »
I do get it Hondo. But the article that you linked to, the one that was supposedly blaming Obama’s tax deal for the reduction in spending was CLEARLY talking about the payroll tax holiday- something which Obama was FOR extending and the GOP was against. While you or I may agree or disagree on whether or not SS is taxes or entitlements (the Republican tradition is to NOT count them as taxes). Either way you were either lying or ignorant when you suggested that the article was blaming the entire tax deal for the reduction in consumer spending. Clearly it was only blaming the end of the payroll tax holiday.
Either way, SS has not contributed one dime to the debt. The bulk of the debt comes from Republican policies. You’re bringing up SS as a red herring. Is there long-term problems with SS? Sure. But your “solution”- wrecking it now because we may have to wreck it later- is laughable, sadistic and unnecessary.
Ex-PH2: not in every way. In terms of basic honesty and trustworthiness, I’d rate Nixon and Obama (and LBJ, for that matter) as roughly identical. I might put Clinton in that same group as well.
Sippy: no, the Republican tradition is to count them as taxes, and always have been. It is the Democratic party and other progressives that have consistently portrayed FICA taxes (which is what they legally are and always have been) as some kind of “insurance premium”, “retirement savings”, or “investment”. They’ve been doing that ever since they coined the term “social insurance”.
They’re not “premiums”, “savings”, or “investments”. They’re taxes, which are used to fund income transfer payments to people who qualify for no other reason than that they’re still breathing and once paid those taxes themselves for a period of time.
You really might want to take off the ideological blinders and read the history of “social insurance”. You won’t find too many in the GOP that have ever proposed or actively supported such programs as Federal entitlements, and you will find many that have called them what they truly are – creeping socialism.
Even if we were to go by your absurd definition of what constitutes “telling”, Jonn was still quite full of shit. Here’s what he wrote: ——————————————————- I don’t remember the rum-runners getting forgiven for plying their illicit trade after Prohibition ended. All they had to do was keep their mouths shut about their particular sexual preference, and they couldn’t…now they get to cash in on it. ——————————————————— The phrase “All they had to do” is a declaration that this was a fairly easy thing to maintain. By your own statement you’re admitting that it is not. By your definition, abiding by the policy means that you can NEVER show any affection for your loved one in public whether in uniform or out whether off duty or on. No hand holding at a theater, no kissing in your car, not even a use of the words “Dear” or “Honey” while shopping in a store. By your definition of “Telling” ALL those things are reasons for discharge. If that’s the case then his statement that this is an easy policy to maintain- not just for a day- but for years- is absurd. So this whole idea that this was an easy-breezy burden for soldiers to maintain is- by your admission- ridiculous. The reason why there were two people who saw it is because there were two people in the car next to him. Not because he was flaunting it. If there were 5 people in the car, there would of been five who saw the forbidden kiss. Likewise if there was one person, only one would of seen it. Plus that definition of “telling” is certainly not keeping within the spirit of the law. The idea behind the law was to have the soldiers keep it out of the workplace so that the icky, icky gay talk wouldn’t somehow disrupt the workplace. It was not to make it so that soldiers can never show affection ever anytime anywhere. A soldier, kissing his boyfriend while off duty, while ten miles from base, while parked at a stop light is certainly not disrupting the… Read more »
Hondo, I was not defending Nixon. Never that. I was referring to something else entirely.
“while parked at a stop light is certainly not disrupting the workplace.”
Neither is attending a political rally in uniform, but both were still against UCMJ.
They weren’t in uniform or on duty, Twist.
I should of said “he” above, his boyfriend was a civilian. Either way, going by Hondo’s definition of what constitutes “telling” this is certainly a MUCH more difficult policy to maintain then the one prohibiting political speech. 1. It applies to our most basic human contact and speech “boyfriend”, “girlfriend”, “husband”, “wife” are all parts of normal dialogue “Significant other” is not. 2. With the prohibition of political speech you must be in uniform. This applies to ALL human contact- off duty, on duty, in uniform or out, all the time anywhere in the world. I mean attending the gay Mardi Gras in Australia is also a “declaration”.
Either way, this case certainly proves that Jonn’s declaration that this was easy was foolish.
In fact I would even argue against this phrase from Hondo:
————————————————————
Doing so in public with no concern for who might observe them renders the act a public act of symbolic speech. In this case, the act is also a public declaration of homosexual orientation.
————————————————————-
How is engaging in a kiss, in a car stopped at a stoplight while 10 miles from base, while out of uniform and while off duty showing “no concern”. You can argue that he had dumb luck that homophobic civilians were in the car next to him. But it’s hard to argue he showed “no concern.” So once again, you’re full of it, Hondo.
This administration is shit, and they can’t fix shit. They Take zero responsibility for anything and blame a stupid ass idea that came from Obummer himself on the other party, on top of having to prevent ANOTHER government shutdown by the end of the month because they haven’t passed a budget since 2009. Not to mention Pelosi turning her nose up at the idea of members of congress taking a pay cut, because we all know “losing our dignity” is double talk for “if I take a pay cut my wax museum like face will fall off, along with my fake boobies”. This is what happens when stupid people vote for free shit.
insipid, when you are in you are on duty 24/7. UCMJ does not stop after 1700.
“With the prohibition of political speech you must be in uniform.”
No you don’t. I could get in trouble going on facebook while in my PJs and state “I’m in the Army and I think Obama is a dumb ass” and still get in trouble.
There is such a thing as “off-duty” in the military. While it’s true that you’re always “on call” so to speak it is also true that there are times they expect you to work and times they don’t. You can argue semantics all you want, but they were not at work, they were nowhere near base and they were not in uniform. Nor did he announce to the people in the car next to him “I’m in the Army and i’m about to kiss my boyfriend”. Which would be the equivalent of what you’re talking about. Try as you might, this is nothing like the prohibition against political speech in uniform. The fact they were out of uniform when this occurred proves that.
#18 Ex
You present gleaning (!) as an acceptable retirement option? How precious! Why not offer up a cardboard sign and rental space next to the VA to beg money?
And yes, Obama is Nixon. Or are you looking at pictures of the two men, trying to find the resemblance?
Phag boy the pornographer labels homophobic anyone who finds it immoral, repugnant, and reprehensible for one man to poke his dick in another man’s ass or mouth. Me, I am homophobic. I choose to be homophobic. How did we get to where the queers are mainstream and the straights are the deviants?
So UCMJ does not apply when not in uniform and “off duty”?
So what you are saying, sipdick, is that those who expect, no demand, accountability of each and every elected and/or appointed pol of any ethnicity/party/gender et al are racist homophobes?? If not, then what IS the point of your idiotic comments in this thread about the economy and gubmint overspending???
I know that you are a troll, and apparently a complete and utter fool, but could you at least make some sort of effort to address the topic?
Thank you.
@42 – ODave — you are such a dip. Gleaning, or harvesting food crops left behind or not perfect enough for the food service industry, but still usable and nutritious, is a public service. It provides food for other people who cannot afford, or do not have access to, food/produce, etc., and it goes to food pantries all over this country. The Society of St. Andrew how has a seed potato program which sends enough seed potatoes each spring to places in rural America like Appalachia, which you would know if you had bothered to read the link I provided to you.
If you think that gleaning, which is an old timey word for after-harvest food crop recovery is somehow an embarrassment, you’ve got rocks in your head. It recovers food crops that will otherwise be thrown out. Does that make it sound like such an awful thing? I don’t.
“Set up a carboard sign and space next to the VA and beg for money”? Why would I do that?
Or did you read only the parts of my post that suited you so that you could let everyone here no exactly what a small-minded jerk you are. You make Insipid look warm and welcoming by comparison.
How can you possibly be so completely obnoxious, and still feel good about yourself? I don’t think you have a decent bone in your body.
Spiffy, if, as you say they were ‘out of uniform’ – i.e., in civvies — then how did anyone know either of them was in the military?
The guy wasn’t giving his boyfriend a blowjob in the car, 2/17. There were no dicks in asses or in mouths. It was a kiss. Just a kiss. I’ve seen 10s of thousands of heterosexual kisses in public and in mass media, and believe it or not, my mind does not instantly go to dicks in female mouths, vaginas or asses. If the sight of two men kissing instantly makes your mind “go there” (probably with a huge hard-on) then that says more about you then it says about them.
You have a “right” to be homophobic and I have a right to say you’re a moron. Just keep your puritanical beliefs out of our laws and public policy and we’ll be fine. Mmmm kay?
At least, thank god, there’s an insult that pertains to my actual life!
@47- Because the two witnesses that were in the car next to him were civilian’s that worked on the same base.
How did this go from the crippled economy to homosexuality? I swear, I only looked away for an hour or so.