The Smart Money's Gloomy Scenario

Reader Comments
Back to blog

+1

soundtracks of AL 6:00AM July 17, 2009

I agree with the propositions in the article, but not all of the comments posted. Reagan was a great president, but those who got elected on his political coattails got obsessed with his rhetoric and carried his conservative ideals to extremes. Enough of the Left-Right ideological arguing. In general, Chaos Theory, based on observation of natural systems, explains well how the inner feedback loops of any system inevitably correct the excesses and abuses. American pragmatism and common sense are driving the corrections, not "left" but back toward the center. Reasonable persons can disagree with "how" this best occurs for the good of the whole, but casting ideological roadblocks into the path of emerging centrist policies make no sense at all. True patriots admit mistakes were made and move on.

Edward Bickford of VA 10:57AM April 14, 2009

Most of us with economic and management training prior to 1975 have felt uncomfortable with the changes to our system and values that have taken place since about 1970. The changes have reduced our ability as a nation to manage recessions and prosperity within our borders as well as the security and peace that allows us to live daily lives. Many reputable academics and consultants warned us in the 70's and onward that the proposed changes being enacted and the inexperienced people being empowered would change the very fabric of our lives. Unfortunately no one listened and we sought world peace and global security by dismembering the very ways our society made itself great and a beacon to the world. Many foreigners seeing what has happened to Americans do not want their countries to be like us any longer. We have dropped from one of the highest per capita incomes to one of the lowest in the industrialized world. Globalism, the new world order, and supply side economics have failed us!

Kip Walls of OK 2:39AM April 14, 2009

There you go again. You leftists or whatever you are that just posted you have no clue. Go study econ from the Austria school or Friedman. Give me a break if you want the wonderful 1970’s again we are headed right down that path. This was not a failure of regulation it was a failure of government getting too big. You leftists love to look at the current problem with blinders on. You completely ignore that the gov in their infinite wisdom distorted the market and gave us the situation we are in. The gov screws up everything it touches, and yet you think it is the answer. Is that not the definition of insanity? Get a life quit drinking the cool-aid and think for yourselves. We can return to prosperity but we have to get BO out without too much more damage. If you raise taxes on the rich do you think they are going to try as hard as they do and give the rest to you, taint going to happen. They will sell everything they have and retire to the Bahamas and let you rot in hell. I know I am not going to work for you I will find a way around it. Think about it. If you love socialism so much feel free to pay more than you do now I will not.

True Conservative of WI 10:09PM April 10, 2009

The 25 years of a booming economy which started under Reagan and his followers sounds a bit better to me than our current outlook. And the high taxes of the 50's, 60's, and 70's didn't see near the standard of living increases that we've seen since. In my opinion, we had a good thing going and screwed it up. The government, Congressional and recent Administrations, relaxed or removed regulation designed to stop dangerous excess. This isn't really about lower taxes or higher taxes... the government has already put the bill on the backs of the taxpayers. This is about being smart and playing the economic game by sensible rules. They didn't, and it came back to bite us.

Brian of MO 5:33PM April 10, 2009

The last cycles winners have reason to be gloomy and worry that things will not go back to the way they were. They're proabably right and that is reason for optimism. The last cycle had a narrow group of big winners. The next cycle is likely to have a much larger group of small winners with few if any big winners. Top income earners are likely to see stagnent income and higher taxes. Middle and lower income earners are likely to see higher earnings and lower taxes. Industries like health care will probably seen a declining share of the GDP. But health care security and choice will go up with national health insurance.
While the administration is anti-protectionism I think that is a loosing position. The American people are demanding some and that is a good thing as it will reduce out sourcing. The temporary decline in energy prices will end and reduce out sourcing as well as transportation costs make close to market production more cost effective. Unionization in areas like India, Mexico, and the rest of the third world will drive up labor costs helpping everyone.
No things will not be the same. Yes the top 1% will not do as well next time around but they can afford to do a little less and will find that a rising base lifts everyone.

Bill Couture of CA 2:38AM April 10, 2009

that the way out is to reduce the top income tax rate from 35% to 25%, plus suspend all capital gains and inheritance taxes. That "might" raise GDP, depending on whether they include such stuff as sales of credit default swaps and other derivative funny-money games inside the SUMMATION of GDP.
I believe that the way for ordinary people to climb out is to raise the top income, capital gains and inheritance rates so that an either/or scenario is set up for folks at the highest end. You "either" spend your resources hiring more people at higher compensation, "or" you pay most of it to tax. That worked just fine in the 50's, 60's and 70's---but it was bamboozled away from YOU by Reagan and his followers.
Don't buy nonsense. Lower taxes at the highest end do not create jobs.

Muser of NM 4:34PM April 09, 2009