June 1, 2003
AND NOW... SOME STARTLING INSIGHT FROM OUR PRESIDENT
Thank goodness our President attended an Ivy League institution of higher learning like Yale University; otherwise we, the"American People," would never benefit from such startling economic insight as this:
When people have more money, they can spend it on goods and services. And in our society, when they demand an additional good or a service, somebody will produce the good or a service. And when somebody produces that good or a service, it means somebody is more likely to be able to find a job.
Yes folks, that's right... those very words were actually spoken by the President of the United States during last week's White House ceremony in which the much ballyhood $350 Billion Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 (you know, the one providing average American's with little to no economic relief, while the richest of American's benefit the most) was signed into law.
Click Here to read Bush's entire remarks.
Posted by Mikal at June 1, 2003 8:53 AM
| TrackBack
I too have heard/seen the contradictory statements from Bush regarding how to get the unemployment and economy fixed. It's astonishing how in one breath he comments how demand will increase supply causing a need for more jobs, yet at the same time, he will sign a bill giving the rich even more money.
I have never seen in any of my Econ courses (yes, I was the nerdy Econ major), a method of increasing demand for workers by giving more money to the rich. Every textbook, professor, and economic statement I've ever encountered explain the demand for workers the same way:
"The demand for labour is found (derived) from the demand for the finished good. There will be an increased demand for workers if: There is an increased demand for the finished good and workers increase their productivity." http://www.bized.ac.uk/stafsup/options/notes/econ208.htm
I guess the Republicans tend to use the "law of diminishing returns" as their basis for giving the tax breaks to the rich. They supposedly figure the less money the corporations have, the less they can afford to hire workers. I still firmly believe that no matter how much money these corporations have, and they have a lot as it is, it won't do any good if there is no DEMAND for their products/services.
I just had to add one more reply. One of my main concerns is the retirement/death of the baby-boomer generation. The baby-boomers are at about 80 million compared to us Gen-Xers at 40 million. What happens with this huge deficit as it continues to grow and grow? In 10 years, the baby-boomers are going to retire/die. The Gen-Xers are left to deal with this huge deficit the Bush administration is creating. It took the tail end of Bush Sr. and Clinton 10 years to bring us to a surplus that Bush Jr. squandered within the first two years. By doing my math, if we oust Bush in 2004, 2005 is the year the new President will really kick in. 10 years later at 2015 will be the length of time it took the Clinton administration to bring the economy back to life. I will be 42 years old. The average baby-boomer will be 70, retired, or even dead.
If we Gen-Xers don't get help from the baby-boomers now to start paying off the deficit, then we will be in SERIOUS trouble within the next 10 years.
" In the 1980s, Ronald Reagan also cut taxes (from far more draconian levels) and failed to cut spending: the result was an entrepreneurial boom, but also huge deficits, which were reduced only when Mr Bush's own father raised taxes. Bush the younger is heading down the Reagan road, with the additional huge problem of those retiring baby-boomers. Unless he changes tack, he could leave a terrible mess behind him." http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=1812317
Post a Comment:
|
