My plan for the Republicans to get us out of the recession

[makattak]

Alright, now, as I've said before, I'm an economist, so I hope people don't get too overwhelmed by the technical details of this plan.


Republicans in the House and Senate, I have the answer that will get us out of the recession far faster than any Obama and Democrat plan.

Listen carefully, now.



Here's what you need to do:

STALL.

That's it. Stall EVERYTHING as much as you possibly can. Hold up every single vote in the Senate. Don't let anything get by.

Normal recessions last around 12-14 months. According to numbers, this mild recession has lasted close to a year now. (This one is likely to last a little longer thanks to the previous "bailout" package)

As for the suffering, the govenment just reported that the jobless rate is 7.6% http://money.cnn.com/2009/02/06/markets/bondcenter/credit/?postversion=2009020608

SEVEN POINT SIX PERCENT.

Economists think the natural rate of unemployment (rate an economy needs to survive and grow) is between 4-6%.

That means we have between 3.6% and 1.6% of unhealthy unemployment.

Seriously, stop panicking.

The economy needs time to adjust to mal-investment. We need to allow the bad companies to be weeded out so that better companies can use their resources (some of those resources being PEOPLE).

Things need to hurt for a little while. Attempting to "alleviate the suffering" will only prolong it.

So there's your mission Republicans. Stall. Stall for all you are worth.

I promise, if you can stall for this next year, EVERYONE will be much better off.

[roo_ster]

I'll buy that plan for a dollar.  Likely to cost me a lot less in the long run.


I think our gov't usually does the most good when it is in gridlock.


"When you see ten problems rolling down the road, if you don't do anything, nine of them will roll into a ditch before they get to you."
----Calvin Coolidge

I think CC is pretty much the ideal for a POTUS.

[makattak]

I'll buy that plan for a dollar.  Likely to cost me a lot less in the long run.


I think our gov't usually does the most good when it is in gridlock.


"When you see ten problems rolling down the road, if you don't do anything, nine of them will roll into a ditch before they get to you."
----Calvin Coolidge

I think CC is pretty much the ideal for a POTUS.

Perhaps. Give me Grover Cleveland though:

"Cleveland vetoed 414 bills in his first term, more than double the 204 vetoes cast by all previous presidents."

http://www.usconstitution.com/grovercleveland.htm

"Cleveland vigorously pursued a policy barring special favors to any economic group. Vetoing a bill to appropriate $10,000 to distribute seed grain among drought-stricken farmers in Texas, he wrote: "Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the Government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character. . . . "

He also vetoed many private pension bills to Civil War veterans whose claims were fraudulent. When Congress, pressured by the Grand Army of the Republic, passed a bill granting pensions for disabilities not caused by military service, Cleveland vetoed it, too."

"Elected again in 1892, Cleveland faced an acute depression. He dealt directly with the Treasury crisis rather than with business failures, farm mortgage foreclosures, and unemployment. He obtained repeal of the mildly inflationary Sherman Silver Purchase Act and, with the aid of Wall Street, maintained the Treasury's gold reserve."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/about/presidents/grovercleveland/

[Balog]

Wow, that's one non-consecutive pimp.

[Zardozimo Oprah Bannedalas]

Perhaps. Give me Grover Cleveland though:

And he was a Democrat of the old school... before they went crazy as bedbugs and elected FDR.

[longeyes]

Stall.  Do nothing.  But have plenty of wax in your ears.  And a flak jacket on.

[MechAg94]

I heard they did put out an alternative stimulus plan with a bunch of tax cuts, but it was voted down.  If they keep doing that, they can at least trumpet their attempts to do something better.

[roo_ster]

Perhaps. Give me Grover Cleveland though...
http://www.whitehouse.gov/about/presidents/grovercleveland/

That was....beautiful. 

Let's clone him.  Using private-sector dollars.

[Balog]

I can now describe my political affiliation as "Grover Cleveland democrat". 

[MicroBalrog]

I think CC is pretty much the ideal for a POTUS.

Not in the modern era. Doing nothing and stalling is no longer good enough. We must work to actively eliminate programs and entire departments to get to a Coolidge-level of freedom.

[Standing Wolf]

Seriously, stop panicking.

Works for me.

[Scout26]

I think I had previously posted my advice to all our elected reps:

"Don't just do something, Stand There !!!!!"


 

[seeker_two]

Stalling and opposing every effort worked well for the Democrats during both Bush terms (before they started signing off on Dem-friendly bills)....let's return the favor....

[longeyes]

But seriously, folks...

If we don't realize by now what's on tap and that we are going to have to be actively obstructionist, we are kidding ourselves.  Digging in our heels will just mean being dragged to the slaughterhouse.

[Scout26]

Digging in our heels will just mean being dragged to the slaughterhouse.

I will not go willingly.......

[txgho1911]

Why not advance this admin. With sarcasm and satire. Go ahead with a real good strong dose of power corrupts.

How else will the rest of society understand a 200 year rollback.

[Jimmy Dean]

honestly, I kinda want the repubs to let this BS stuff slide on through.  I know and you know, that it will make the economical meltdown more prolonged and a harder storm to ride.  BUT, if the repubs do the right thing, and it causes the issues to become fixed, then the dems get the credit, and we are stuck with them for a few more elections, which may be worse in the long run.

If the repibs say screw it and let the stuff go through, then when it fails, we can just all blaim the demorats. :)

[Don't care]

.

[seeker_two]

Digging in our heels will just mean being dragged to the slaughterhouse.

I plan to dig in so deep that they'll have to bring the slaughterhouse to me.....figuratively speaking, that is.....

[De Selby]

Let's see here:  how many banks have failed in the past year? 

What's the drop in stock value over the same period?  What's that, some people were going to retire on that money, and crashing stock values are a bad sign for the economy?

Record numbers of foreclosures?

Yeah, calling this economic situation "mild" doesn't seem to square up with the facts. 

Of course, you can believe the government statistics on employment....but those were the same ones that were telling us there was very little inflation when gas and food tripled in price over a couple of years.  And low unemployment doesn't necessarily mean good economic health-a nation of 10 hour a week part timers is not in good economic shape.

I've seen it pointed out here, and I'm starting to agree with the position that the economic was in such bad shape that without the first bailout of the banks the currency would likely have become worthless.

There are tougher times ahead, and whatever direction this country takes, the people who are proposing "sit back and do nothing" are the surest guarantors of political irrelevance that either of the two parties will find.

[Waitone]

Call me skeptical of any statistic originating in government house.  GDP, inflation and unemployment stats are political pronouncements. 

Here is a different view of the vaunted 7.1% unemployment figure
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article8607.html

[MicroBalrog]

I've seen it pointed out here, and I'm starting to agree with the position that the economic was in such bad shape that without the first bailout of the banks the currency would likely have become worthless.

Without inflating even further, the currency would become worthless?

[Perd Hapley]

There are tougher times ahead, and whatever direction this country takes, the people who are proposing "sit back and do nothing" are the surest guarantors of political irrelevance that either of the two parties will find.

If they market it that way, yes. 

If on the other hand, they couch it in terms of defending struggling businesses from burdensome regulation/taxes, that could possibly work.  Though of course, the media will still just paint it as obstructionism, sitting by while millions lose their jobs, etc.  And they've got the jump on us by making Wall Street out to be the bad guy, so...

I think it might be better for Republicans to propose their own stimulus plans, which amount to govt. doing less.  That is, proposing changes that amount to looser regulation and lower taxes, probably with some token "We're from the govt. and we're here to help" programs thrown in. 

[Logos]

No....they better start doing something.....like following people with a clue.  America voted for change.....not the same old Republican plan.

[MicroBalrog]

No....they better start doing something.....like following people with a clue.  America voted for change.....not the same old Republican plan.

These people's constituents elected them to do the Republican thing, remember?

It's their moral duty to do the Republican thing.