BloggingStocks http://www.bloggingstocks.com BloggingStocks http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/media/feedlogo.gif BloggingStocks http://www.bloggingstocks.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/<![CDATA[U.S. budget deficit remains serviceable, provided U.S. economy grows ]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/26/u-s-budget-deficit-remains-serviceable-provided-u-s-economy-g/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/26/u-s-budget-deficit-remains-serviceable-provided-u-s-economy-g/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/01/26/u-s-budget-deficit-remains-serviceable-provided-u-s-economy-g/#commentsFiled under: , , ,

One of the biggest misnomers in the current fiscal stimulus debate concerns the United States' ability to service its budget deficit and national debt (pdf).

Provided the fiscal stimulus package is passed, the national debt ceiling will increase to $12.1 trillion from the current $11.3 trillion.

Deficit approaching intolerable levels?

Economic conservatives, market absolutists, and the like argue that the annual budget deficit and national debt are approaching intolerable levels. In truth, what they're arguing against is a needed government intervention and New Deal-type spending required to jump-start the U.S. economy -- even if it means the economy will plunge into a deeper recession without the stimulus. It seems some economic conservatives would rather see the nation's economy suffer, than to violate one their flawed economic theories.

Continue reading U.S. budget deficit remains serviceable, provided U.S. economy grows

U.S. budget deficit remains serviceable, provided U.S. economy grows originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Mon, 26 Jan 2009 17:45:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>budget deficitfiscal policyfiscal stimulus packagegdpKeynesiansmonetaristsnational debtPaul KrugmanU.S. economyMon, 26 Jan 2009 17:45:00 EST<![CDATA[Does Obama symbolize the start of a new economic era?]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/11/21/does-obama-symbolize-the-start-of-a-new-economic-era/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/11/21/does-obama-symbolize-the-start-of-a-new-economic-era/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/11/21/does-obama-symbolize-the-start-of-a-new-economic-era/#commentsFiled under: , , ,

One of the ironies of public officialdom is that those elected officials who deal with budgets and tax policy rarely fully grasp the economic sea changes when they occur in the nation.

Whether it's due to habit, tunnel vision, groupthink, arrogance, ignorance, surrounding yourself with sycophantic staff, or some combination, congressional lawmakers are often the last to notice economic shifts that occur cyclically.

January 2009: A new era begins?

One of the key economic questions for investors and other stake holders is whether President-elect Barack Obama follows through with his campaign promise to be an eclectic, someone who tries a center-left policy here, deploys a center-right policy there because it works, and who does not implement typical party -- or partisan -- responses to problems; i.e., solutions from traditional sources of power in his party.

But an even more-telling economic question concerns what the Republicans will do. In November 2008, the Republican Party suddenly found out that it was very white, male, old, Protestant, and by-and-large economically and fiscally conservative. The aforementioned guarantees in the years ahead that they'll hold at least 20 or 25 Senate seats in a chamber of 100, and if they're not careful, about the same percentage of House seats. Meanwhile, the nation's electorate is increasingly nonwhite, female, younger, non-Protestant, and by-and-large economically and fiscally moderate, and in some cases, liberal/progressive.

Continue reading Does Obama symbolize the start of a new economic era?

Does Obama symbolize the start of a new economic era? originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Fri, 21 Nov 2008 17:46:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>banking sectorbanksBarack ObamaCongressDemocratsfiscal policygdpKeynesiansObamaRepublicansU.S. economyFri, 21 Nov 2008 17:46:00 EST<![CDATA[NYT's Krugman to President-elect Obama: Think big ]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/11/11/nyts-krugman-to-president-elect-obama-think-big/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/11/11/nyts-krugman-to-president-elect-obama-think-big/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/11/11/nyts-krugman-to-president-elect-obama-think-big/#commentsFiled under: , , ,

New York Times (NYSE: NYT) columnist and Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman argues, in so many words, that, indeed, the United States must go back, to get to the future.

Krugman's advice for President-elect Barack Obama? Think big. Contrary to selected, conservative arguments about President Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, the reason the New Deal had limited, short-term success was the fact that FDR's economic policies were too cautious, he said.

The New Deal: new life

The New Deal's long-term success and achievements, including the structural changes to the U.S. economy (including Social Security and bank deposit insurance), have proved to be both durable and essential, most economists, including Krugman, agree.

Hence, President-elect Obama should think big from the get-go, Krugman says, and avoid the mistaken belief that 'government spending made the Great Depression worse,' and Obama should move forward with a large fiscal stimulus to put people back to work, for work that needs to be done in these United States.

Continue reading NYT's Krugman to President-elect Obama: Think big

NYT's Krugman to President-elect Obama: Think big originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>1920s1930sBarack ObamaDemocratsFDRfiscal policyFranklin D. RooseveltgdpGreat DepressionHooverKeynesKeynesiansNew DealObamaPaul Krugmanpump primingRepublicansRoaring 20sU.S. economyWorld War IITue, 11 Nov 2008 16:00:00 EST<![CDATA[NYT's David Brooks: It's the start of a different kind of economic 'cycle' ]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/11/05/nyts-david-brooks-its-the-start-of-a-different-kind-of-econom/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/11/05/nyts-david-brooks-its-the-start-of-a-different-kind-of-econom/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/11/05/nyts-david-brooks-its-the-start-of-a-different-kind-of-econom/#commentsFiled under: , , ,

New York Times (NYSE: NYT) Columnist David Brooks draws attention to a U.S. economic discussion and reality that's been all-but-sidelined in the past three decades, particularly among younger investors and others who believe that history began in 1981. Namely, that there's been a distinct cyclicality to the nation's economic / public policy history.

Is a new progressive era ahead?

That may come as a surprise to market absolutists and others who see economic history and their view of economic progress as a straight line towards privatization. In fact, periods of economic conservatism and liberalism -- the latter also known as progressive reform -- have cycled for much of the nation's history.

For Brooks, those economic blinders help explain both the market absolutists' befuddlement at the financial crisis around them and their inability to adapt to the electoral demands brought on by the crisis. Market absolutists are in a straightjacket of a party that is ailing and part of a conservatism that is behind the times, he says.

On the cycle's timing, economist David H. Wang argues that the old era ends and the new era begins not when social pressures build from the bottom-up, but when institutions -- like investment banks, mortgage lenders and credit default swap issuers -- fail from the top-down.

Continue reading NYT's David Brooks: It's the start of a different kind of economic 'cycle'

NYT's David Brooks: It's the start of a different kind of economic 'cycle' originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Wed, 05 Nov 2008 17:45:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>110508bond marketcredit marketDavid BrooksDemocratsderivativesforeclosuresKeynesiansmonetaristsmortgage backed securitiesmortgagesRepublicansWed, 05 Nov 2008 17:45:00 EST<![CDATA[Ben Stein: Perhaps the market isn't always right]]>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/04/28/ben-stein-perhaps-the-market-isnt-always-right/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/04/28/ben-stein-perhaps-the-market-isnt-always-right/http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/04/28/ben-stein-perhaps-the-market-isnt-always-right/#commentsFiled under: , ,

The perceptive and common sense-rooted Ben Stein, in a business column in The New York Times, has weighed-in on the credit crisis, and for market absolutists, it's an argument they probably don't want to hear.

Stein, like many of us, has pondered how the massively well-paid men and women of Wall Street could create such a catastrophe. How did some of the smartest, talented executives, Stein ruminates, generate such immense losses that "they made banks clam up on lending -- at great risk to the economy?"

Compelling questions

Stein asks: Where were the fail-safe devices? The government watchdogs? The ratings agencies? A speech by Greenlight Capital hedge fund manager David Einhorn at a Grant's Interest Rate Observer event, provided the answers -- the unfortunate truths of the recent housing/credit boom -- which Stein summarized:

Continue reading Ben Stein: Perhaps the market isn't always right

Ben Stein: Perhaps the market isn't always right originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Mon, 28 Apr 2008 17:24:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments]]>asset backed securitiesbank sectorBen Steinbond marketcredit crisiscredit crunchcredit marketsDavid EinhornderivativesEinhornGreenlight Capitalhousinginvestment banksKeynesiansleveragemonetaristsmortgage backed securitiesmortgage defaultsNew York TimesSECSecurities and Exchange CommissionSteinMon, 28 Apr 2008 17:24:00 EST