Some Liberals Frown at Obama's Economics Team

fake phentermine websites

KsDUpS Great site. Good info.

fake phentermine websites of IN @ Aug 02, 2009 12:02:29 PM

phentermine rating site

4uudO0 Perfect work!

phentermine rating site of WA @ Aug 01, 2009 22:21:10 PM

Goolsbee

Just remembered 2 things:

Goolsbee's Jan 2008 NY Times article fails to consider that the TAXABLE income of the weathiest 1% 1993-1997 decreased (after Clinton's tax increase), instead Goolsbee points out that total income rose 1993-1997. The significance is explained here (but they consider the economic behavior/reaction of ALL of the people whose tax was increased, not only the wealthiest 1%, as Goolsbee's NY Times article does): http://www.ncpa.org/~ncpa/w/w74.html . ...Of course anyone in Goolsbee's present official capacity should be concerned with only TAXABLE income if you're concerned with increasing IRS revenues. Goolsbee being pragmatic about taxes, as always. ;-)

Also, while Goolsbee's Jan 2008 article tries to explain away the 90's (and fails, for reasons such as my last paragraph), Goolsbee fails to even TRY considering JFK's era, and explaining how decreasing taxes produced greater tax revenues from the wealthy (due to them "coincidentally" earning markedly more as soon as JFK & others decreased taxes on them). I think it comes down to this: Does Goolsbee want the rich to fill the nation's tax-coffers, or does he want to penalize them? (He HAS lamented about income-disparity, which can be a problem...but making everyone the poorer is not a good solution. Instead, try to make everyone wealthier. Goolsbee sure knows how to make everyone [not only the idle rich] poorer: Is today's recession "helping" those who were foreclosed upon? As recently as March 2007, Goolbee thought so (as I linked to in my last post), even when other economists noticed the looming crisis. How about those getting laid-off because they work for the corp's who just lost 1/2 their stock value and therefore can't invest in as many job-producing ventures. It's so nice that in attempts to "help" the poor into homes they can't afford [i.e. predatory lending], Goolsbee and all the other subprime-defenders harmed us all...but especially harmed those whose households were already fiscally-precarious, living paycheck-to-paycheck, who tend to be...poor.)

Publius of TX @ Dec 01, 2008 09:56:47 AM

Goolsbee

I doubt the "SMART money" on Wall Street is confident in Goolsbee, for the following reasons. (and I wonder who, in particular, you're saying IS confident in Goolsbee?)

1. If people on DailyKos think Goolsbee is "right wing," they must think Billary is right wing: Goolsbee heads the PPI...PROGRESSIVE Policy Institute. Though he's from the U of Chicago, he rejects most of the teachings of the libertarian-majority there (who've won so many Nobel prizes) in favor of these "progressives" (Who ironically, have been retrogressive in economic issues, such as the next 2 issues in my post...). Or as George Will says: "Goolsbee no doubt has lots of dubious ideas...about HOW GOVERNMENT CAN CREATIVELY FIDDLE WITH THE MARKET'S ALLOCATION OF WEALTH..."

2. Goolsbee is one of the people telling Obama to do what a past blog of yours has disagreed with (and you were correct, for the reasons I'll give below): Goolsbee tells Obama to RAISE the cap-gains rate...but not more than the now-crippled economy can withstand (blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/08/obama-clarifies.html). But today's LOWER cap-gains rates caused IRS revenues from cap-gains to INCREASE...three examples of this to show it has occurred CONSISTENTLY: raising the rate in the 80's dropped revenues, then lowering to 20% increased revenues...in a bullish market, lowering to 15% increased revenues again...in a more bearish market. A debate moderator pointed this out to Obama during his debates with Hillary...then asked Obama why in the world he would propose raising cap-gains rates to the levels that slowed economic growth and IRS revenues: Obama's answer was to completely ignore these facts that the moderator presented ...It's still on youtube if you're interested. OTOH, Goolsbee keeps an open mind about lowering taxes (as you pointed out, he's pragmatic enough not to tell Obama to raise rates to 90%: nytimes.com/2008/01/20/business/20view.html?_r=1 Still, he'll cripple the economy a LITTLE by telling Obama to raise taxes a LITTLE. He's also fairly in favor of int'l free-trade, as Will points out.)

3. Goolsbee thought subprime mortgages were safe even as late as 2007: nytimes.com/2007/03/29/business/29scene.html?ei=5090&en=9a15c212b118d691&ex=1332820800&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=print

... Contrast Goolsbee with economists who SMARTLY predicted today's banking crisis early as 1995: cato.org/testimony/ct-ni3-8.html (Contrast Goolsbee even with Senator Chris Dodd: Goolsbee is criticizing Dodd in the 2007 NY Times article I linked to above, because Dodd reversed his position and stopped supporting the mortgage CEO's who are at the center of today's recession. It's noteworthy that Dodd was the only senator blinded by taking more bribe-money from the mortgage CEO's than what Obama took from the CEO's: opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/update-fannie-mae-and-freddie.htm I wonder if the money Obama took from mortgage CEO's had anything to do with his choice of the subprime-supporter, Goolsbee? ;)

Obama fooled American voters (I agree with Larry.) but unfortunately is a corrupt crony-capitalist, not free-market capitalist. of TX @ Dec 01, 2008 06:53:09 AM

This is so sad

This is what you get when the mainstream media doesn't do it's job and you vote for someone you know very little if anything about.

Obama is smart enough to know that if he is going to have successful Presidency that he can't govern like the loony left acts. But it was important to make them think he was one of them so he could get the votes.

If you lefties are ever looking for beachfront property in Arizona give me a call. LOL

Larry of CA @ Nov 26, 2008 18:13:48 PM