You must be registered to comment and vote on comments.
Its amazing all the manufactured calamity a decrease in increased spending can cause.
They should have tightened their belts back in 2008 when they saw unemployment rising.
Right... cuz less spending always creates jobs. It's been proven.... uh... never. However, it has been disproven many, many times.
dogman, thats what most families and businesses do when thres money issues, you spend your way out of it? What do you really gain when you have to spend money to create a job. Its the Obama economy its all fake, feds printing 85 billion a month propping up the stock market and the feds keeping interest rates near zero propping up the housing market.
Many families spend money to improve their situation. They may invest in a new battery for their car to make sure they can make it to their job reliably. They may repair their furnace so that their pipes don't freeze, thus creating a larger problem. The main breadwinner may take courses to enable them to move up in their job, thus making more money and attaining more job security.... regarding what we gain when creating a job.. it depends on the job. We may find ourselves with an improved infrastructure, more cops on the street, more firefighters, more teachers in our schools. We would no doubt be better off than if more nannies, gardeners, and personal assistants are hired with our tax dollars being funneled to the 1 percent.
dogman, i dont think many families or businesses would spend money on ther items you listed if they were 17 trillion in debt. Oh ya you think the deficit doesnt matter i forgot.
That would be foolish on their part. And there is a difference between deficit and debt. There is smart spending (investing) and not so smart spending (tax cuts for the rich). You could catch fish by hand, or invest in a fishing pole. You could walk a mile to the river to get fresh water, or invest in a well. You could give tax cuts to people who will spend it, thus energizing the economy, or give tax cuts to the rich, who will sit on it or shelter it.
dogman, or you could get the 47% percent who pay nothing to start paying something, or you cut welfare, or you could get some of the 47 million on food stamps off it, i dont have any issues giving tax breaks to people paying all the taxes, when 10% of the people pay 70% of the taxes something is wrong.
"the 47% percent who pay nothing" -- again.. I'm unaware of anyone who makes an income that doesn't pay taxes. I know that conflicts with Romney policy that failed abysmally and probably cost him the presidency... but sometimes reality is harsh
$174k salary for a congressperson is more than the governor makes. Seems wrong
Your comment is being reviewed for inclusion on the site.
Comments will be reviewed before being published.
425 Portland Av. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55488
© 2013 StarTribune. All rights reserved.
StarTribune.com is powered by Limelight Networks