Fed Favors Temporary Stimulus Package
Does this sound like a Republican?
NPR-Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke said Thursday that the U.S. needs to enact a targeted and timely stimulus package that helps those who are struggling and that it should do it sooner rather than later.
Bernanke said he is in support of a $100 billion measure to stimulate the U.S. economy and that such a plan should be implemented quickly.
“To be useful, a fiscal stimulus package should be implemented quickly and structured so that its effects on aggregate spending are felt as much as possible within the next 12 months or so,” Bernanke told the House Budget Committee.
UPDATE
Economy on center stage in S.C. GOP race
FROM YAHOO
Clinton, Obama step up calls for economic stimulus
Romney Pledges to Save Southern Economy
Wall Street Draws Little Comfort From Bush Stimulus Plan
Tax rebates seen as economic stimulus
The real question is cutting taxes without the needed spending cuts, which has driven out of control debt and drove the dollar in the ground fiscally responsible? The ideal situation is cutting taxes and spending, but any rational person knows balancing a budget is better than running out of control red ink!
The concept of pay as you go mobilized our country toward rational fiscal policy. Newt got the message when Perot got 19% of the vote as an independent based on controlling debt as a major issue!
This is why the GOP trashing Ron Paul is very similar to what happen to Perot. The GOP does not get real fiscal conservatives understand cutting taxes without proper spending cuts is irresponsible and immoral to future generations.
The government manipulates statistics. That much we know but many don’t know how they do it. Here is an example that helps explain why Congress and the President believes we are already in downturn that could turn into a recession
quote:
But let’s return to the initial claims data. Every week I get an analysis of the claims data from long-time reader John Vogel. Mostly it is not very exciting, but he does a very thorough job of examining the actual data and comparing it to previous years. Stick with me here as I run through a few numbers.
Last week there were actually 521,280 initial claims. That number rose to 547,637 this week. So why didn’t the seasonally adjusted number rise? Because in week three of previous years the number dropped, often considerably. In 2007 the number was essentially flat. But in 2006, the drop in the third week was 116,000 and in 2005 it was 226,000. There were also big drops in 2004 and 2003, 187,000 and 172,000 respectively.
So, when you smooth the number out by making seasonal adjustments, you expect a large drop in week three from week two. Except that we did not get that drop, we got a rise of 26,000, which is clearly not the trend for the last five years. That also squares with last week’s employment survey which shows job weakness.
So, why use the seasonally adjusted number? Because the actual number is very volatile. Last week’s number was considerably lower than the years of 2003-5, by an average of 175,000 or so. That would be considered good, yes?
But this week’s number is the highest since 2002.
Investors Insight: Thoughts from the Frontline by John Maudlin
But there is more in the article that helps explain the worries Congress has
quote:
Oh, and that means that 137,990 municipalities that were insured by Ambac will see their credit ratings drop and their costs rise. Think their customers will hang around?
=================
Cities are seeing problems now that will hit tax revenues that are already falling if they need to borrow more.
Still more
quote:
49% of firms said prices paid were up. Last August only 16% said that. Only 2% said they were paying lower prices for input materials.
==================
This is not something a “stimulus package” can end quickly. The 2nd half of the year may be the soonest we can expect some good news and by then, the election campaigns will be filled with “its the economy stupid.”
Who will come out ahead in that?
You know things aren’t good when the administration, Congress AND the Fed is calling for an economic defibrillator.
“Damn it Jim, I’m a doctor not an economist…”
Captain
Good point!
That is the problem, Capt. Menace. They have used our lack of knowledge in this nation about fiat currencies, the global banking system, derivatives, etc. to do things that should have never been done.
Most people don’t know how and why the Federal Reserve was created or how they are tied to the Central Banks of Europe or the CFR, or Tri-Lateral Commission or Bilderbergs but, when you look at the membership of those groups, you find so many common links to major U.S. (and European corporations) and the Central Banks and governments of several nations, that you begin to see this has been a global “elite” running the show for almost 100 years.
If you didn’t see those memberships on the “Are we Having Fun Yet, thread, you might want to check them out. (near the end of the thread)
And don’t feel bad about not being an economist, most of those in Congress aren’t either and don’t understand what is going on either. They depend on “experts” supplied to them by the party’s leadership to tell them what is good or bad.
No worries Jan, I do not feel bad about being an economist.
An economist is the only job position where you can be wrong more often than not and still not get fired.
Heck, the economists over at the Heritage Foundation are still saying we’re not headed for a recession. We just headed toward a period of “reduced growth”.
Never mind what a survey of CFOs indicates. What do free market business leaders know anyway?
By the way, Captain_menace, Jack Lohman mentioned a boo, “Hostile Takeover,” by by David Sirota that I got from the library and am reading.
It is a very well researched book that shows the corruption between corporations and our politicians. The author isn’t aware of or doesn’t understand that the corporations are just another tool of the elite, however. But, the book is good if you want to see how the elite funnel money to our politicians to get them to do their bidding.
When you look at the membership of the CFR, Tri-Lateral Commission, Bilderbergs, Bohemian Club, you see the same names at times and same corporatons represented. Politicians, national leaders, central bankers, corporate leaders, etc. are all meeting and planning agendas and providing the appointments many governments use as “experts” to advice their elected officials.
The government is in a panic. The power of “our elite” is being challenged. Why they have used debt and manipulation of the government, the “new elite” in Asia, and other places, are using savings, purchase of our debt and companies, loans to us with our own currency from trade deficits, partnerships with nations that have raw materials (rather than intervention like we do), and low tax and business costs to take our jobs.
This massive shift in power is starting to pick up speed and has “our elite” in a panic. Our currency, financial system, economy, and standard of living are all in jeopardy as the GAO, Bernanke and others have warned Congress.
I think they can “bail us out” one more time if they are very careful, with sovereign wealth funds and more loans but, it will only delay the coming crisis.
I’m not a believer of global conspiracies.
We are the sheep.
They are the predators.
Predators fight and kill eachother for control over the sheep (food supply).
As a sheep it really doesn’t matter who the predator is… the end result is the same… you’re dinner.
That is why we have to return to founding principles where the “sheep” control the government. That isn’t possible in a centralized government. It has to come from local government controlled by the people that then control the county and then the state with each layer having less power. Finally, you have the state controlling the central government.
That requires, in our nation, returning to the original check that kept more power in the state, appointing Senators. We need to, therefore, repeal the 17th Amendment that took that power of checking the central government away.
Democracies, can succeed because the “sheep” vote themselves things they don’t want to pay for. It is like hiring shepherds to protect them from the wolves and then asking the wolves to pay for the shepherds.
Eventually, the shepherds realize the wolves are who pay their salaries and any threats of loss of salary, once addicted to them, means they abandon the sheep and side with the wolves and the sheep become the “meal” by their own foolish attempt to get “somebody else” to pay for their protection.
It is like unions asking factories to pay for their insurance. Eventually, the insurance companies, wanting to keep the contracts start siding with the “wolves” who pay them instead of the “sheep” who demanded the insurance in the first place.
Same with a nation that depends on the wealthy and business for tax revenues. Any threat of loss of either and government starts siding with them because they are the ones paying the taxes more and more as more and more lower income people are exempted.
When that takes place, the democracy fails.
Should have been “Democracies can’t succeed because the “sheep” vote themselves things they don’t want to pay for.
That of course is human nature and impossible to prevent from continuing to collapse in almost all cases. It certainly appears the be the case here.
Thanks for making this site
Hi there…Man i love reading your blog, interesting posts ! it was a great Sunday