Tuesday, January 20, 2009

CHANGE.. Has Arrived!??? Faux-Bama?

1) We at FAUXRUMORS want to congratulate the 44th President of the United States, Barak Hussein Obama! We hope/pray for his success the next 4 years. Hopefully his 'Change" will be for the better!

2) However we are not optimistic based upon his past record and his pronouncement of how he intends to improve the economy. " Government will get us out of this"

3) Government spending has NEVER improved an economy in the history of the planet. Last time it was tried in such a grand scale, 1933-1940 we had 7 years as bad as any of The Great depression. Only WWII got the U.S out of that! Wanna hint on how things will go? Look to see how the financial world is seeing his assention. Will we see the stock market sharply rise on his inauguration?

4) On a related note we were amused to find this blog. We neither recommend nor endorse it! http://faux-bama2009.blogspot.com/


Tom said...

Only WWII got the U.S out of that!

WWII was a government project, if you think about it.

Paul said...

Huh on point 3, the Economy certainly improved under FDR. If WW2 got us out it - what you are really saying is FDR simply didn't spend enough and control the economy sufficiently....


1) Paul: By the numbers: The economy was worse in 1940 than it was in 1933 when FDR took the oat of office.
2) WWII ended the depression because we(the U.S.) was the only industrialized country not ravaged by war.
3) Thus whole factories/industries were created that caused the creation of millions of new private sector jobs. Something the New deal and the 'make work' jobs of the 30's simply couldn't/never could do.
4) Thus spending 800 BILLION to "create or save 4 million jobs" (costing $200,000 in tax payer dollars/job saved) will be a colossal error!

Tom said...

2) I'm fairly certain that there were other industrialized countries that weren't ravaged by war. Canada, for instance.
3) Nevertheless, these wartime industries were driven not by the private market but by government mandate. It's not like a bunch of entrepreneurs got together and decided to build aircraft carriers -- the government demanded them, in the same way that it demanded a national highway system, TVA power stations, space shuttle program, etc. Conventional war is fundamentally a government enterprise, not a market-based development.
4) If you're going to calculate cost/taxpayer, you should include the value of the jobs created. For example, let's say it costs $200k to create a bridge-building job. Well, that bridge might create $500 million in economic development, and eventually we might find that the actual cost per taxpayer was closer to $100k. If that bridge builder's income tax across the course of his career, plus his share of the taxes generated by the economic development, plus the money he's not collecting from welfare, amount to $100,001... the taxpayer is in the black. This is to say nothing of the effect of rising employment on crime, education, public health, and so forth.

There is a time for large public projects, and we're in such a time today. There is no better return on public or private dollars than the creation of new employment. Given the state of the private market, it's unlikely that we'll find any better solution than proactive public policy.

Antzmarching said...

The economy DID NOT improve under FDR! Check your history... The RAW DEAL actually prolonged the Depression... WWII ended the Great Depression - get your facts straight... Another product of an institution of higher education... Faux, the next 4-8 years will illustrate Socialism on Parade... Yeah, congrats Barry!


1) Tom: If recent history of government spending is a clue, we'd simply get a ton of "Bridge to No-Where's"
2) IF they were to give a few hundred billion in tax breaks for building nuclear power plants, and other essentials we'd be OK with that.
3) At least that keeps the governement, and its less than responsible fiscal spending policies, as far out of things as possible.

Contact the Media