The Fed gave it's thumbs down to the Obama economy yesterday by announcing a debasement of the currency ,with $267 billion infusion of monopoly money in the form of extending "Operation Twist " .The plan began late last year ;and was supposed to end this month.It is basically the Fed buys and sells short-term and long-term bonds in an attempt to lower alreadty low interests rates .The new plan is to keep rates at net 0% until 2015, a year longer than the last estimate.

This seems like a punt. When interest rates are 0% already and the market still hasn't been sufficiently " stimulated " then what are they hoping to achieve ? Low interest rates do nothing . The Japanese tried that for 20 years . But I smell QEIII in the fall when the panic over reelect really kicks in.

Perhaps it is not the monetary policy ,but the adm, fiscal policies that need addressing .
The markets of course already have factored this move into their calculations ;and short and long term prospects for the Obama economy remain grim.
Here in NY ,unemployment is on an upward trajectory over the year and I'm pretty sure it is a national trend.

But take heart . The President recently achieved a mile-stone.
He played his 100th round of golf since he became POTUS .

Well Tom the Fed could try the time tested stimulatory affect of actually raising rates and thus expectations and confidence. Buying up old bonds doesn't seem to have had the desired effect but issuing new ones with a higher rate might.

You are in a very difficult position you have no room to move on interest rates and no ability to move on tax the two main tools a government has to regulate an economy. This leaves uping expenditure to stimulate the economy and there appears little hope of that. Could it be said that these are signs of a failed economy? A failed economic model?

Now I want you to know I'm just posing questions, because in your circumstances I don't have solutions short of some sort of large scale protectionist move imposting a high tarriff barrier in imports.

We could be doing a lot better here Clete if the conservative right wing loonies would stop playing pure hardball politics and clogging up the works, so they can extract more cash for their fat cat gods they worship. You ever see an elected official root for failure, and actually try to tank the country... AGAIN!!

They hate the Fed!

Tal how do you extract cash when the economy has tanked? Cash in a government sense can only come from one source OPM and that also holds true for industry and commerce.

It was once said that money was made round to go round and that means the medium of exchange must be exchanged. This point appears to be lost on politicians and the captains of industry who appear to be waiting for a number nine bus

The economy has only tanked for the middle class industrial worker, and poor and young people Clete. The rich are even richer, corporations make more than they ever have, and the banks are so flush with assets (trillions), they can't spend it all. We still have the richest, most expensive Army in the world, but its not enough for the greedy b@stards at the top of the money pile. They want a bigger tax cut, paid for by taking more from the least.

There is plenty of money for them to steal. 15 trillion to be exact!

I find it hard to agree with that number Tal. That is the sum that, in following your train of thought, they have already stolen.

Yes your industry is a malaise, this is because you have allowed those same persons to export your industries to the low cost economies and imported their unemployment. The answer to this is to raise interest rates so they are required to make their money work harder. This is the reverse of conventional economic thinking

We do that by taxation here Clete, and job creation by investments, that how the economy works here and the only reason it isn't is the political wars we are having because the rich guys don't have to sell anything to make money, as their wealth is over seas, and its cheaper to by congress and make new laws and loop holes to get fatter.

You are right though it's the reverse of what we should be doing and have done in the past, which was raise taxes by 4 or 5%, grow government by a few percentage points, and fix the stuff that's broken through out the nation, and help states hire cops, teachers, and firemen, garbage men and other city service workers. We have done this successfully many times before but until we end the political wars, we are on hold.

Don't worry, we will lock up the right wing loonies by the end of the year. Oh and the fed didn't give a thumbs down, they predicted slow growth because of the political wars going on, and in preparation for Europe getting screwed. You been listening to Tom again ain't you??

Yes makes a lot of sense .The rich want the economy to tank because their fortune is enriched that way . Do you even think about the stuff you write ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

We do that by taxation here Clete, and job creation by investments, that how the economy works here and the only reason it isn't is the political wars we are having because the rich guys don't have to sell anything to make money, as their wealth is over seas, and its cheaper to by congress and make new laws and loop holes to get fatter.

You are right though its the reverse of what we should be doing and have done in the past, which was raise taxes by 4 or 5%, grow government by a few percentage points, and fix the stuff thats broken thru out the nation, and help states hire cops, teachers, and firemen, garbage men and other city service workers. We have done this successfully many times before but until we end the political wars, we are on hold.

Don't worry, we will lock up the right wing loonies by the end of the year. Oh and the fed didn't give a thumbs down, they predicted slow growth because of the political wars going on, and in preparation for Europe getting screwed. You been listening to Tom again ain't ya???

---

Taxation is a different economic measure to Interest Tal, yes I agree that it is time in many parts of the world to contribute to economic growth and this must be done by reversing the damaging policies and effectively dealing with the problems of our societies. Those who derive the most benefit from the society should be those who contribute the highest rate of tax. I know the conservatives hate this sort of thinking but they are also the greatest consumer of services since it all facilitates maintaining their lifestyle.

I see the following policies as damaging. Removal of tariff barriers, free trade, zero interest rates, low tax regimes, subsidies to inefficient industries. Each nation should be as self sufficient as is possible and protect its own internal industries. Now I know that what I say flies in the face of the trade policies of the US and others but they sowed the wind and reaped the whirlwind.

Competition is what should drive prices and interest rates, and rich guys don't consume enough to support an economy as large as ours.

Now lets get some good paying jobs going and stop a few rich guys from buying politicians, and we may get off the ground with this wounded duck, and fix a bridge or two.

The conservatives have been pushing their oligarchy by privatizing every thing in sight for decades and they are really ramped up now, if they can keep the loonies, and low informed hyped up and active.

Yes these red necked politicians are a problem and so are their patrons. The red necks like to drive over bridges on the way to the airport but they don't want to maintain them. They forget it is taxes that put the highways there and taxes that fill in the potholes. They think because they have exported all the jobs to a low cost country that things at home can be done cheaper too. That makes them cheapskates

Quote:

---

The answer to this is to raise interest rates

---

Quote:

---

We do that by taxation here

---

Hello ? Recession reduce taxes not raise taxes . You and your progressives have taxed us out of competitiveness. I mention NY unemployment earlier. The Hudson Valley used to be a hi tech hub. IBM and others had their corporate HQ here. Before these jobs get outsourced overseas they get outsourced out of state . We lost them because NY thought the way to go was to squeeze the last nickel out through taxation. You really do have to lose this notion that you can tax your way to prosperity . Jobs go where there is a favorable business environment ;not the highest taxed areas .
Maybe you think that a sluggish 0-2% growth and unemployment close to double digit is the new normal . If you want a growth economy then both the President's and the Fed's approach are counter-productive. Bernanke's trying .He can't make the government change it's burdensome regulations ;he wasn't the one who pumped billions of dollars into failed stimulus schemes . But he should know by now that lower interest rates don't work. I already gave the Japanese example . They tried it for a decade . You want to know who gets screwed ? The retiree and responsible people who save; that's who.
If policy makes it cheaper to mfg. in California than NY it will happen. If policy makes it cheaper to mfg. in Texas than in California, it will happen. If policy makes it cheaper to mfg. overseas than in the US, it will happen.

World stocks fall amid US jobs, housing gloom - Yahoo! News
Another example of rich people (who lost $millions in wealth value yesterday )screwing everyone no doubt. Yeah they want a bad economy because they get richer when the economy sucks . I get it.

Speaking of policies that force corporations to look for more friendly confines, ask French businesses how they feel about their prospects with the new all Socialist government?

French businesses fear "systematic strangling"

Quote:

---

Bracing for a less business-friendly government, Medef President Laurence Parisot said employers' concerns were falling on deaf ears in the government as they faced what she described as unprecedented uncertainty due to Europe's debt crisis.

She warned margins were tumbling, orders collapsing and cashflow dwindling as investment and hiring were put off or cancelled outright in the face of the uncertain economic outlook.

"We've had many meetings with the staff in ministries to explain what's happening, but we are becoming deeply distressed. We fear a systematic strangling," Parisot told a news conference.

The government of President Francois Hollande, who was elected last month on pledges to fight unemployment and revive growth, is preparing to hike taxes on large companies and make firing workers more costly for employers to discourage layoffs...

"Let's be careful not to transform our country into a super-rigid enclave completely out of touch with the functioning of market economies as found everywhere else," Parisot said.

---

And the money quote?

Quote:

---

British Prime Minister David Cameron said at a G20 meeting in Los Cabos Mexico that Britain would roll out the red carpet for French companies seeking refuge from the French taxman.

---

Need I say more?

Its one thing for states to compete against each other, but quite another when we compete against sweat shops. Seems to me the rest of the world should be chasing US, not the other way around.

What we should work for a sweat shop here? Then Apple would come here right? Still waiting for that list of regulations that stop big business from creating jobs.

I will not create a list .That would take too long . The volumes of pages that represent the law in this country is too massive ;and the individual rules divined out of the mind of the interpretation of the law by the individual regulatory agencies is beyond belief. A lot of my time is spent making sure the documentation coming out of my dept complies with some inspector's interpretation of these agencies interpretations of the volumes of rules published to interpret the thousands of pages of law created by Federal ,State and local governments.
In fact ,one of the biggest and fastest growing areas of my company are the ones that are regulatory compliance related .

Now ,since you asked ,I'll give you one of the silliest ones I've read about recently. It involves cellulosic ethanol . You remember ,in the middle of the last decade President Bush started making speeches about biofuels ;he often referred to switchgrass . Well Congress passed a law to basically subsidize this by mandating that refiners begin to include a percentage of this fuel into the mix. The mandate for 2012 is 500 million gallons. It rises to 3 billion gallons in 2015 and then 16 billion gallons in 2022.The EPA was given enforcement .

The assumption was that cellulosic ethanol would actually be available as an additive by 2012 . The assumption was wrong.

However ,that has not stopped the EPA from fining refineries for non-compliance anyway ,even though the law gives them discretion .

So now the refiners have a choice ,pay the fines ,or challenge the EPA in court. They opted for a court challenge ,which means they get to waste money in the challenge ;and we the people get to waste tax dollars defending the EPA. Look and you will find many such examples .

This one is a bit extreme ;but it does accurately represent the challenges that business has in regulatory compliance. Good sound regulation is necessary. Burdensome over regulation is a business killer, New regulations proposed in the 1990s took effect in my industry last decade. Since then the predictable happened . Many of the smaller companies have dropped out of the game ;and the business has consolidated into the few larger companies that had the resources to comply. Yes we hired more people . But the numbers we hired does not make up for the numbers displaced when the smaller companies closed shop.

Bureacracy gone mad and it was a republican what done it, go figure they can actually do something when they try

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

bureacracy gone mad and it was a republican what done it, go figure they can actually do something when they try

---

I support them only because they are slightly better than the Dems.The problems in this country resulting from bad governance have been a bipartisn effort. Too many Repubics think their mission is to be better managers of the nanny state . They have a different party identification ;but they are still statists at heart.

Tal, I have to deal with codes and regulations from OSHA, DOT, state and local fire marshals in 3 states, MSHA, NFPA, NEC, CGA, NICET and God knows what else. It is literally mind boggling.

Several large corporations we serve use a third party to certify safety compliance of their contractors. Most require confined space training. We don't do confined spaces so we request exemptions on that program. One rejected our request because our techs have to work on ladders. In an aircraft hangar. How much less of a confined space can an aircraft hangar be? But yes, federal regulations include some jobs where the possibility of falling exists under confined spaces. Silly me, I thought that fell under ladder safety and/or fall protection. Do you understand the complexity and cost between ladder safety and fall protection compliance and confined space compliance? All to stand on a ladder and check a smoke detector?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

I support them only because they are slightly better than the Dems.The problems in this country resulting from bad governance have been a bipartisn effort. Too many Repubics think their mission is to be better managers of the nanny state . They have a different party identification ;but they are still statists at heart.

---

Tom free the purse strings and watch growth come back increase interest rates and taxation and watch the dollar appreciate The old ideas of economic management arnt working there can be no growth at zero interest and lower tax just grinding everything down

I get both your points and understand the hassles of compliance first hand having worked in a steel mill all my life. I won't address the local contractor issues that have more to do with competition, and qualifications than regulations. But I can address the regulatory sense behind them as in both your examples it was to upgrade and add efficiency while cutting costs even though the initial out lay may be greater than what one wants.

Just using Toms example which isn't all that extreme, not only does government help fund the research into new technologies and products, but they have many programs through the energy department that have aided start up plants and investment across the country, 4 here in Texas speech, and they have started exporting the technology through out the world.

I think the rub in regulations can be best described as holding on to old science that's really out dated, and inefficient, yet highly profitable, but dangerous, and a reluctance of businesses, both large and small to adjust to the new technologies. The best example I can give is the oil companies not having proper procedures to confine an oil spill, or poisoning an aquifer, from natural gas extraction. Or you do remember the fight over installation of new scrubbing and capture technology for coal fired power plants in our state?

Yes I will agree with Tom, that we will see, and have seen the closing of many smaller businesses that, to be frank, cannot keep up with regulatory changes, it's a hassle just getting an air conditioner for your home upgraded now a days, but if we don't upgrade, the stuff falls apart, right? I can tell you that the price of not doing it is a lot more expensive than doing it NOW.

To your point of losing an exemption and the conflict between a ladder job, and a confined space one, that's more a matter of training, upgrading of skill sets than the regulation themselves. I know personally this conflict, as like you, it's a never ending educational process.

We already know that business, and people won't do anything without proper incentives. Now I will agree that the ones making the regulations should be as qualified as they want us to be for sure.

But I am not for banks and businesses making the rules at all, input yes, full control NO! We have seen how that works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

yes makes alot of sense .The rich want the economy to tank because their fortune is enriched that way . Do you even think about the stuff you write ?

---

Hello tom:

As noted, the economy only tanked for the middle class and the poor. The wealthy are STILL wealthy. In fact, they're WEALTHIER. So, WHEN and/or IF the economy tanks again, it'll be the middle class and the poor who get hit the hardest... Interestingly, those are the very people who vote for Obama.

Therefore, after a great deal of thought, I believe the wealthy (and the Republicans who carry water for them) would very much indeed welcome a tank about now. For sure, they're doing EVERYTHING they can to MAKE it happen.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

Tom free the purse strings and watch growth come back increase interest rates and taxation and watch the dollar appreciate The old ideas of economic management arnt working there can be no growth at zero interest and lower tax just grinding everything down

---

you have half the equation right . Have a strong currency policy ;and across the board flat and low marginal tax rates... and for God's sake... no more bailouts! Then watch the recovery!

Quote:

---

I think the rub in regulations can be best described as holding on to old science that's really out dated, and inefficient, yet highly profitable, but dangerous, and a reluctance of businesses, both large and small to adjust to the new technologies.

---

Well in the example I gave the government is subsidizing fantasy technology ;and making the old technology pay for it . The example of corn ethanol proves that yeah you can turn almost any bio source into fuel . But does that make it desirable to do so ?
My bottom line is that if there was a market for switch grass ethanol ,then the private sector would be begging the government to allow it... just like the private sector is now begging the regulators to unleash natural gas ,and shale oil .

The public wants lower prices, and the private sector wants low cost and high profits. That hardly makes them eager for change, or investments. We have 4 switch grass plants running in Texas, and more to come all over the country so again, Fox is wrong!

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/01/17-3

http://news.iafrica.com/sa/799710.html

http://8020vision.com/2011/04/17/con...d-in-fracking/

Yeah I suppose if the government offers enough free cheese then anyone can open up a company that would have no chance to compete in the open market. Look at Solyndra . Oh wait... they are belly up after taking the taxpayer's money. The fact is that it takes more energy to produce biomass ethanol than it produces. So it is only a false ideology ;and a whole bunch of government cheese to keeps such products on the market.

Oh yeah.. that FOX stuff bores me.

That's some old ground, Tom, but its you free market traders that put yourselves in competition from global forces, some very unfair, and then you think you can blame science, and government for the failures. Doesn't work that way, and no country can survive running government by a broken, unfair business model, that has become a casino for the richest.

Supply side economics has always gone through contractions that are a part of doing business, the normal cycle if you will, but there are still people who get caught in that cycle, which is the flaw you free traders (NOT job creators) seem to be able to ignore in pursuit of profit. You small government people love it when corporations make their own rules, no matter the quality of life for the rest of us, just the cost of doing business, because business knows best.

That's working out just great for rich guys, not so much for the rest of us. Business makes its own climate to grow and survive, and they have done great at it, by being above the law, because they can make the law.

We wouldn't need government cheese if we could afford our own, or wait on charity and philanthropy, if we could work. But big business is YOUR answer, and the free market. The free market is only free if you can afford the premiums, while they let you, because during the next business cycle, they take it all away.

That's just the cost of doing business right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

yeah I suppose if the government offers enough free cheese then anyone can open up a company that would have no chance to compete in the open market. Look at Solyndra . Oh wait ... they are belly up after taking the taxpayer's money. The fact is that it takes more energy to produce biomass ethanol than it produces. So it is only a false ideology ;and a whole bunch of government cheese to keeps such products on the market.

oh yeah..that FOX stuff bores me.

---

Tom are you telling us capitalism doesn't work or that it only works for a selected few? So certain companies can get government subsidies like cost plus contracts but others shouldn't get them. I agree that no private companies should get government subsidies, that if a government wants an industriy to exist then it should establish it and take all the risks

Quote:

---

Tom are you telling us capitalism doesn't work or that it only works for a selected few? So certain companies can get government subsidies like cost plus contracts but others shouldn't get them. I agree that no private companies should get government subsidies, that if a government wants an industriy to exist then it should establish it and take all the risks

---

No I'm saying that capitalism works for all . Getting government favor ,or having effective government approved cartels (the consolidation of industries due to over-regulation )is not capitalism ,it is merchatilism . That is the system that Tal ,who already has stated that it's too bad that the small businesses cannot compete in and over regulated environment ,both condemns and supports.

“A study for the Small Business Administration, a government body, found that regulations in general add $10,585 in costs per employee. It's a wonder the jobless rate isn't even higher than it is.”United States' economy: Over-regulated America | The Economist

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

you have half the equation right . Have a strong currency policy ;and across the board flat and low marginal tax rates ....and for God's sake .....no more bailouts !! Then watch the recovery!

---

You lack compassion Tom this isn't an ideological argument it is a way of overcoming a problem and that problem is that the welthy are keeping their money and the middle and lower class have no money to invest the reality is you are all in the same leaking boat and just because one man has a life jacket doesn't mean he doesn't have to bail. So the answer is if the wealth won't invest you take the money. By all means give them an opportunity, give them an incentivebut give them an ultimatium get in line!

take their money... you just explained the left perfectly .

If that's what it takes Tom governments have been doing that for a long time and your tea party attitudes not withstanding you have representation. That was the requirement wasn't it? The premise upon which your country was founded? Not no taxation but no taxation without representaion, even your founding fathers understood the wisdom of taxation

And I never said "no taxation" . What I said was low flat rates of taxation ;and limitted government .

What you are talking about is a perscription for anarchy. Taxation is far for 100% and the rate of tax you have now won't pay the bills even with smaller government what you have to do is get the blood sucking military off the teat, get rid of all those subsidies and make taxation higher until you get the problems under control. Your votes have been bought but now is the time to recognise the damage that has done. You also have to recognise that people have to have a reasonable income before they are taxed. Taxing the poor doesn't achieve much.

You need a different approach to government, consolldate your inefficient local government. Ditch your local government police forces, stop the filibuster, make your taxes uniform, align your electoral terms in other words kick your politicians in the arse

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

and I never said "no taxation" . What I said was low flat rates of taxation ;and limited government .

---

And I say fair taxation according to need, and a strong effective government that meets the needs of the people, all of them. Not one thats controlled, and works for monied interests.

The problem with a flat tax is how its applied, because a standard flat tax that extracts more wealth to the top is as bad or worse than we have now.

Quote:

---

No I'm saying that capitalism works for all . Getting government favor ,or having effective government approved cartels (the consolidation of industries due to over-regulation )is not capitalism ,it is mercantilism . That is the system that Tal ,who already has stated that it's too bad that the small businesses cannot compete in and over regulated environment ,both condemns and supports.

---

That's a false premise Tom, it doesn't work for all, and that's the problem. If it did, we all would have the tools to upgrade, or relocate, as situations change. Ordinary people don't have the resources to relocate and families certainly cannot be uprooted every time the capitalistic business model changes, or FAILS. I never said it was okay, or just to bad when a business fails. YOU did, many times when you always say let the markets determine winners, and losers.

Quote:

---

take their money... you just explained the left perfectly .

---

Another false premise. Not take, but everyone contribute and support the system that's the life blood of the foundations of this nation, EQUALITY, and OPPORTUNITY.

The right wings support of the rich, at the expense of the poor, is not fair or equal. When you create a deficit that you holler so much about, and continue to give tax breaks at the expense of the middle class and poor people, you have life and BS all mixed up!!

When you take, without giving back, that's robbery. When you subjugate others for your own purpose, that's slavery.

The ones who benefit the most, should pay the most. Real simple logic. If they won't give it, then you take it.

Applause!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

I won't address the local contractor issues that have more to do with competition, and qualifications than regulations.

---

It has nothing to do with qualifications and competition, it has everything to do with CYA.

Quote:

---

To your point of losing an exemption and the conflict between a ladder job, and a confined space one, that's more a matter of training, upgrading of skill sets than the regulation themselves. I know personally this conflict, as like you, it's a never ending educational process.

---

Wrong, dead wrong. One is being careful while changing a light bulb and the other is equipment and training for toxic gas monitoring, SCBAs and/or SAR/Escape respirators, ventilation, permitting, rescue planning, attendants, entry supervisors, etc. The difference is enormous.

Quote:

---

But I am not for banks and businesses making the rules at all, input yes, full control NO! We have seen how that works.

---

Yes, you'd rather have the elected bureaucrats who created and covered for the mess they made making the rules.

QUOTE by speechlesstx;
It has nothing to do with qualifications and competition, it has everything to do with CYA.
It may also be a requirement of the insurance carrier, for the customer whose contract you seek. i also know for a fact that the state also has a BIG impact on the qualifications of any contractor work, both big and small.

Wrong, dead wrong. One is being careful while changing a light bulb and the other is equipment and training for toxic gas monitoring, SCBAs and/or SAR/Escape respirators, ventilation, permitting, rescue planning, attendants, entry supervisors, etc. The difference is enormous.
Don't get mad at me if you don't qualify, and others do. Still you got 2 out of 3, and thats not bad. You didn't get the contract because the customer wanted more than you were offering, or could get more than you offered from someone else. thats business as Tom says, fair competition.

Yes, you'd rather have the elected bureaucrats who created and covered for the mess they made making the rules.
That where you are wrong, wrong, dead wrong. An accountant and paper pusher knows nothing about the process and procedure of actual work. Nor the dangers and hazards of the workplace. Dude, I am a blue collar independent, with a ton of experience, so I feel ya, but fact remains what was good enough 10 years ago, ain't so much now, and to keep my rating and certifications, I have to take tests regularly, and sometimes that means some refresher courses. Some rules work for you, some don't, but you can't just throw out the ones you don't like, but you can petition for redress if they are out of line.

Truth is, and I know for fact, there are guys certified to vent check, and look for leaks, that can climb a ladder, and check fire alarms to. Like a 3rd baseman that can play out field, and catch.

A) Why does one need liability insurance? CYA.

B) I'm not mad. We do ladders, we don't do confined spaces so why should we be compelled to go the expense because of overly complicated, often irrelevant regulations?

C) Does that explains why Democrats said there was nothing wrong with Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, they have no clue?

D) We need fire alarm technicians, not vent checkers and leak lookers.

You seem to be under the impression that I'm whining about the need for safety compliance and I'm not. There should be no need for us to spend thousands to comply with irrelevant regulations - just like oil companies shouldn't have to fight the EPA over not using a non-existent product.