"It really isn't that hard to turn the economy around"

[Thunder]

-Michelle Bachmann And people want to vote for her?!!!! Sorry, I was just incredulous that someone people consider a good choice for president could issue such naive words. http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine...y.html?hpid=z1

[tthree]

A large part of the recession is psychological. The politicians talked the economy down so much in the last, record long, presidential campaign that people don't believe in a recovery. Now we are about to enter another election cycle that will be accompanied by the same rhetoric. It could be another long talking down of the economy. When the last election was going on I foresaw this effect coming. I told everyone this was not leadership as few candidates (if any) balanced their doom and gloom speeches with enough sunshine to prevent panic. They did everything exactly wrong to ensure a speedy recovery.

Compound this with the government trying to be the solution. Recoveries don't happen until the government gets out of the way historically.

[Friendo]

I would say it's a unified message. It really is about jobs and the economy. That doesn't mean people haven't [sic] forgotten about protecting life and marriage and the sanctity of the family. People are very concerned about that as well. But what people recognize is that there's a fear that the United States is in an unstoppable decline. They see the rise of China, the rise of India, the rise of the Soviet Union and our loss militarily going forward.

- Michelle Bachmann, August 18th, 2011

[aslan]

Originally Posted by Friendo

- Michelle Bachmann, August 18th, 2011

They all make these gaffs. I remember someone running last time who talked about the 57 states that comprise the United States.

The biggest gaff for me was Rick Santorum laughing at Ron Paul at the debates when Paul was addressing Iran and Israel, and then Iraq. He obviously thought his smirks and condescending looks were in unison with the entire live and TV audiences, but to me he looked the fool. We take killing a million Iraqis very lightly for a supposedly great nation. And his statements that Iran would not dare nuke a nation that could retaliate with 300 nukes of their own made perfect sense.

[Thunder]

I can understand maybe the Soviet Union gaffe, because I believe you'd have to be totally under a rock the last 20 years not to know it doesn't exist anymore despite recent similarities between the way Russia runs its affairs and the Soviet Union did, but the whole statement about it being easy to turn the economy around.... well that definitely wasn't a gaffe and was her opinion. Our nation's brightest economists and the feds don't really have an answer for how to turn this thing around except hoping that printing more money will solve the trick. Either way from what I've read, it seems like this thing might take another decade to fix as you can't just unload all this debt we have right away. It's scary to think that some knowledgeable people have said that the current debt situation is far worse than reported. That is one of the big reasons why a lot of people on here and I have been so bullish on precious metals.

[tthree]

Originally Posted by Thunder

I can understand maybe the Soviet Union gaffe, because I believe you'd have to be totally under a rock the last 20 years not to know it doesn't exist anymore despite recent similarities between the way Russia runs its affairs and the Soviet Union did, but the whole statement about it being easy to turn the economy around.... well that definitely wasn't a gaffe and was her opinion. Our nation's brightest economists and the feds don't really have an answer for how to turn this thing around except hoping that printing more money will solve the trick. Either way from what I've read, it seems like this thing might take another decade to fix as you can't just unload all this debt we have right away. It's scary to think that some knowledgeable people have said that the current debt situation is far worse than reported. That is one of the big reasons why a lot of people on here and I have been so bullish on precious metals.

Buying more currency from the Federal Reserve Bank at $100 plus interest for $100 hard currency that they printed for 3 cents per $100 doesn't help anyones economy but the Federal Reserve Bank's economy. People got on Ron Paul's back for trying to cancel the debt owed on the Treasury Bonds bought with the printed money by the Fed but most people are so clueless they think the treasury got the money free rather than selling Treasury Bonds to get it. The Fed has likely sold these bonds by now to other parties so how will they cancel this ill gotten debt. Why would we let them loot the treasury again? Take the power of this private bank away that has them print the money and give it back to the government. At least printing money would benefit the treasury instead of the private bank known as the Federal Reserve Bank.

[zengrifter]

Originally Posted by aslan

Rick Santorum laughing at Ron Paul at the debates when Paul was addressing Iran and Israel, and then Iraq. He obviously thought his smirks and condescending looks were in unison with the entire live and TV audiences, but to me he looked the fool.

They are all doing it - in 2008 I watched McCain and Romney do it, like they could barely hold their laughter.
Training from their campaign consultants, no doubt. zg

[Most Interesting Man]

Maybe it isn't too hard -- for economists. But since those who set our policy are politicians they don't have the necessary qualifications for the job.

[aslan]

Originally Posted by Thunder

I can understand maybe the Soviet Union gaffe, because I believe you'd have to be totally under a rock the last 20 years not to know it doesn't exist anymore despite recent similarities between the way Russia runs its affairs and the Soviet Union did, but the whole statement about it being easy to turn the economy around.... well that definitely wasn't a gaffe and was her opinion. Our nation's brightest economists and the feds don't really have an answer for how to turn this thing around except hoping that printing more money will solve the trick. Either way from what I've read, it seems like this thing might take another decade to fix as you can't just unload all this debt we have right away. It's scary to think that some knowledgeable people have said that the current debt situation is far worse than reported. That is one of the big reasons why a lot of people on here and I have been so bullish on precious metals.

For those of us who have been alive for the better part of the twentieth century, Soviet Union was synonymous with Russia for the longest time. There is no Soviet Union, but I still catch myself saying Yugoslavia, or Czechoslovakia, neither of which any longer exist. Old habits die hard.

I wish I had the cash to be bullish on precious metals, but when you live on a pension you just tuck your head in turtle style and hope for the best.

On turning the economy, if the Republicans had free reign as the Democrats did in 08, then some extreme measures could be taken. (1) Obamacare could be repealed. (2) Lower taxes and other business incentives could be quickly instituted. (3) Government spending across the board could be cut. (4) As the economy got on its feet, entire departments could be scuttled (guess which ones?)

You don't turn a ship the size of the US around on a dime, but you could turn the economy around in short period of time "relatively speaking." But if we continue the direction we are going in, I fear we may get to the point where turn around is impossible or next to impossible. If not in 2012, then maybe never. That is, at some point the economy may be unresponsive to any external measures to save it. At some point we may have to just grit our national teeth and ride it out.

Yes, I think it is probably worse than they are reporting. If so, all the more reason to take extreme measures as soon as possible. Obama used a an emergency situation to justify his drastic spending measures. The same "burning platform" scenario would justify the reverse. I just hope it's in time.

[aslan]

Originally Posted by Thunder

I can understand maybe the Soviet Union gaffe, because I believe you'd have to be totally under a rock the last 20 years not to know it doesn't exist anymore despite recent similarities between the way Russia runs its affairs and the Soviet Union did, but the whole statement about it being easy to turn the economy around.... well that definitely wasn't a gaffe and was her opinion. Our nation's brightest economists and the feds don't really have an answer for how to turn this thing around except hoping that printing more money will solve the trick. Either way from what I've read, it seems like this thing might take another decade to fix as you can't just unload all this debt we have right away. It's scary to think that some knowledgeable people have said that the current debt situation is far worse than reported. That is one of the big reasons why a lot of people on here and I have been so bullish on precious metals.

All of our nation's brightest economists are not recommending printing more money to solve the problem. Why doesn't anyone give recognition to those economists who believe lowering taxes on the business sector will provide the spark needed to get things humming again. Some economists believe that when the business sector is confident that the government has their back, they will have the confidence to begin moving forward again, expanding and hiring. The uncertainty as to where government stands has been contributing largely to the freeze in the private sector. When government deliberately fosters class tension between the haves and have-nots (they used to say bourgeoisie and proletariat), no matter how well intentioned, the wheels stop turning.