Or does it all depend on what the meaning of “will” is?
Good Thursday morning to all who civilly seek substance,
Gov. Tim Pawlenty is in Iowa today campaigning with Sen. John McCain. Bet the rent money that this will set off the latest round of speculation that Pawlenty may be on the national ticket in 2008.
(By the way, this theory doesn’t depend on McCain getting the nomination. If someone beats McCain, the theory goes, putting Pawlenty on the ticket would be a way to mend fences with the McCainiacs. And then there’s all the usual talking points for Pawlenty-the-running-mate-speculation: He’s young, energetic, likeable, talented, articulate, survived the GOP’s ‘06 disaster, comes from a purple state, appeals to hockey players, etc.)
But are the people who engage in this speculation aware (we’ll admit that we had forgotten it until someone recently called it back to our attention) that on May 31, 2006, the day he announced his second-term candidacy, Pawlenty addressed the rumors that he had 2008-related Washington ambitions by saying:
“As to my future, if I run for governor and win, I will serve out my term for four years as governor.”
If you’d like to see and hear him say it yourself, WCCO’s clip of the announcement is viewable on the web, and it includes ‘CCO reporter Karla Hult’s instant analysis that his statement “might well put an end to speculation that the governor would take off mid-term for Washington and a higher office.”
Well it didn’t. Didn’t seem to slow down the speculation for one day.
Why is that? Did Pawlenty equivocate when he made his most definitive statement on the subject? Not at all. Didn’t say he planned to, or expected to, or intended to serve his full four year term, but just flat will. Hard to see the wiggle room in that formulation.
Has Pawlenty taken it back? Nope. Not at all. When put on the spot, he generally says something pretty similar. For example, on Jan. 15 of this year, according to the reporting of esteemed colleagues Pat Doyle and Rochelle Olson, Pawlenty said at a Martin Luther King Jr. Day event:
“I am committed to serving out my term as governor. That’s what I am going to do.”
For some reason, this doesn’t put the matter to rest. Is it impossible to believe a politician on such a matter? Is Pawlenty doing something diabolically clever to fuel the speculation while apparently stating that the speculation is pointless? Are Pawlenty’s statement’s insufficiently Shermanesque?
(When Gen. George Tecumseh Sherman was being considered as a possible Republican candidate for the presidential election of 1884. He declined, saying “If drafted, I will not run; if nominated, I will not accept; if elected, I will not serve.”
This is the prototypical Shermanesque statement. But did people keep speculating about Sherman’s plans after he made it?
If so, might they have been recalling Zachary Taylor? Taylor said, when asked in 1847 about his sudden potential as a presidential prospect following his Mexican War heroics: “The idea … has never entered my head. Nor is it likely to enter the head of any sane person.” He was elected the next year.)
In the interest of putting the Pawlenty matter to rest, we put the question to the governor in the most direct, no-wiggle-room fashion we could devise. By e-mail, we asked:
“If offered nomination for national office in 2008, will you decline?”Â
That’s when things got a little more intriguing. If Pawlenty really sought Shermanesqueness, he could have replied:Â Yes, I will decline.
Instead, Mike Krueger, Pawlenty’s spokesmen on political matters, referred us to this MPR story in which, after the usual statement that Pawlenty is on the list of possible running mates, the story refers to an MPR interview in which Pawlenty said:
“I’m committed to being governor of the state of Minnesota. That’s why I ran. I love it here. I don’t have a big goal or ambition to go be Washington. I’ve got young kids. I’ve got a lot of work to do and great opportunities for public service right here in Minnesota.”
“But if one of the presidential candidates were to ask you to be a running mate, would you accept?” host Gary Eichten asked (good question). Pawlenty replied:
“I said I would serve out my term as governor if I was re-elected. And that’s what I intend to do,” Pawlenty said.
Strangely, the next sentence in the MPR story goes like this:
Steven Schier, a political science professor at Carleton College in Northfield, says he’s sure Pawlenty would give serious consideration to joining the McCain ticket if asked.
Okay, we don’t really want to beat this to death. But to truly gain that Shermanesque clarity, Pawlenty should probably have said: No, I will decline any offer to be anyone’s running mate in 2008.
So, to be perfectly compulsive, we answered Krueger’s email with this follow-up:
“Thanks, Michael. We’ll take that as the answer, if we don’t hear differently. But we do want to press a little. This is a yes or no question. Gary didn’t get a yes or no answer. But we’d like to have one.
One question we want to write about is why people don’t seem to accept the governor’s commitments as ending the matter. Here is a chance to be clear.
Can the governor answer yes or no - If offered nomination for national office in 2008, will you decline?”
That was Tuesday afternoon. This is Thursday morning. We haven’t heard back.
It’s interesting to see the press trying to hold Pawlenty to his word. Even the conservatives who put him in office couldn’t make him do *that.*
Run Timmy, RUN!!! Then the rest of the country can see that Michele Bachmann isn’t the only phony Christian conservative out of Minnesota!!
Like a strong cup of coffee in the morning, I enjoy logging on to see what insight people have pertaining to the topics, and as usual, the comments quickly turn negative. Good old Billdo rips our Governor, and DJ rips Bachman. You people are idiots. You subscribe to a failing Newspaper with out of touch “journalists” and a liberal, hate filled agenda. Before you ask, this is why I enjoy confronting you, and asking for your solutions. FYI, an recommendation for a solution should not begin with, “It’s the dirty, Reupublican’s fault.”
“(By the way, this theory doesn’t depend on McCain getting the nomination. If someone beats McCain, the theory goes, putting Pawlenty on the ticket would be a way to mend fences with the McCainiacs”
Who are the “McCainiacs” and are they relevant to even need to mend fences with them?
I thought that he would have seriously considered it with McCain, may have even been angling for it, but since McCain has sunk like a stone I doubt any other candidate would consider him.
I am less concerned about whether he going to run for higher office in ‘08 than I am with the fact that he’s in Iowa campaigning for John McCain while I’m paying him to govern Minnesota.
Use your heads. How is he going to be Vice President and serve out his full term as governor at the same time? This is why people turn away from traditional media. Blatant stupidity that feeds obvious attempts to create news where there is none.
Why is it stupidity to ask an elected public official (not a private citizen, BTW) if he will finish out his term? If he would accept the nomination, and run for Vice President, the citizens of Minnesota have a right to know this. Similarly, we have the right to know if he will remain in office for his full term.
The Governor may not like the feedback that comes from saying he would accept the nomination, but bad feedback is a part of political life. Similarly, if he says no, he won’t accept the nomination, his ego may suffer a loss from the lack of national media attention, but then we can all know where he really stands.
T-Paw got in trouble with pledges. He should not make any more.
Black: “He’s young, energetic, likeable, talented, articulate, survived the GOP’s ‘06 disaster, comes from a purple state, appeals to hockey players, etc.)”
I believe the most important point was the very first one…..he’s young. As Pawlenty has plenty of time on his side, I think he is allowing his name to get spun through the usual media channels as potential this-or-that, and he will serve out his term as governor. The intent may be to make himself somewhat of a “chased” commodity (I’m sure there is a better term for that), and possibly opens the door to VP or even a Presidential nod at a later date. In the eyes of the nation, he may become “that Republican governor up north that everyone talks about all the time and seems to like.” Look for Pawlenty on the 2016 Presidential ballot.
Perhaps a bit like Cuomo. The perennial ‘potential’ candidate. I think Jay has it right - better to campaign for your favored candidate (as many governors do) and let speculations simmer in their own juice. Anyway, he did say that he was going to serve out his term. That seems definitive to me. If he changes his mind (e.g. Wellstone), then we can judge what we think of that if it happens. I for one hope he sticks around and keeps a lid on the DFL’s insatiable tax and spending plans. Oh, one more thing - am I the only one who doesn’t even want to think about 2008 yet? Must be a reflection of Bush’s extreme weakness that we’re all so ready for him to leave.
If he runs, he’s just another Republican liar or a Flip-Flopper. I won’t vote for him.
If we won’t run, why is he wasting my tax money for McCaine?
If he runs, he’s just another Republican liar or a Flip-Flopper. I won’t vote for him.
If he won’t run, why is he wasting my tax money for McCaine?
What?
Pawlenty would be an excellent vice presidential candidate. He will never be accused of being visionary, or even strategic. But tactically he is very sound, able to generate plenty of ideas and make some of them happen. He is not presidential material, but could readily fill the second in command position.
As an aside, anyone who gets too excited about the liberal leaning of the Star Tribune editorial staff should do their blood pressure a favor and stick to reading the Wall Street Journal.
Why is it so difficult for liberals to mount an articulate, well thought-out argument without resorting to name calling?
If your party’s nominee for President asks you to be their running mate, I don’t imagine that many would say ‘no.’
Hey Thien - what about Wellstone’s pledge not to run for a third term? I have other examples - want ‘em?
I don’t think the GOP has a monopoly on being flip floppers or lying.
If he is on the ticket in 2008 when the Republican loses, Pawlenty can still serve out his term as governor. No lies or flip-flopping there. It will position him as the front runner for president in 2012. His kids will be grown up by then, his wife will have her state pension and he can move to Washington without a problem.
The current President has screwed up the budget, the economy and our foreign policy so badly that every decision the next president will make will be so unpopular, they will serve only one term. Pawlenty runs, becomes our saving hero.
He may not be a good leader but he’s a good politician.
“[Pawlenty] is not presidential material, but could readily fill the second in command position.”
Probably true; and more in a Dan Quayle way than a Dick Cheney way. Though if you ignore party, probably more like Al Gore than the other 2 examples.
“I am committed to serving out my term as governor. That’s what I am going to do.”
That answers it for me.
No.
Oooh, so when Republicans like Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld lie us into a war that kills at least three-quarters of a million people and turns most of the world against us, that’s EXACTLY THE SAME Paul Wellstone running for a third term?
I’m capable of criticizing Democrats. Are you capable or criticizing Republicans, Mr. Carlen?
Rich, one question:
Please do not read anything else into this. Don’t refer to any other issue.
Hypothetically speaking, if a Democrat was in office right now, considering the Dow is at record levels, would he/she also have screwed up the economy, or would this be good?
Wellstone did keep to his pledge by not ever serving a third term.
Granted, it was with God’s help.
People change their minds. Sometimes for good reasons and sometimes for questionable reasons. My concern is that Pawlenty is going to use his “hold the line” on taxes strategy as posturing for the nation and he’ll not take a look at which taxes might be for the greater good of Minnesota (e.g. gas tax). This political posturing puts him in a favorable light with some folks, but does little good for MN.
Phoenix Woman,
I seem to recall a few Democrats voting yes on the Iraq plan. 750K? What??
Hey Rich, can you please tell me how the President has screwed up our economy? I’m familiar with the left’s talking points on the budget and foriegn policy but I have no idea how anyone can argue that he’s screwed up the economy.
I’m curious to see if you will make an emotional argument or or a factual one.
If he ends up running as VP instead of staying as Guv, it’s a pretty small crime as politics go. I can’t imagine anyone will be moved to vote or not vote based on that. Just like I can’t see any votes moving based on a similar promise made by a certain NY Senator.
This is all part of the kabuki that goes along with politics and just not that big a deal.
Still a lot of hate from the liberals. Besides attacking our country what have they actually done? NOTHING!
Props to TPaw and I for one think he would make a great VP and eventual President.
I’m sure CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC and CBS will starting attacking him very soon.
Factually, the Dow grew at a much faster pace in the eight years prior to Bush taking office than during the six years he has been in office. Is that his fault? The answer, I suppose, depends on which end of the political spectrum one happens to reside.
Pawlenty said he was going to serve his term. He hasnt done anything to indicate he’s not going to. (media speculation is not a positive action on Pawlenty’s part).
Now, many of you want to take a shot at em for something he has not done.
On the other hand, When Wetterling broke her promise, it was all just fine with the same folks that are dissin Timmy today. What a bunch of hipocrites…
BTW, I hope the GOP isnt dumb enough to nominate him.
Peder says “Just like I can’t see any votes moving based on a similar promise made by a certain NY Senator.”
Good example. I think the Sen from NY said “I’m focusing on this race now,” and didn’t say anything about the 08 Presidency. Though anyone that thought that meant the Sen wouldn’t be running in 08 was pretty delusional. Regarding Pawlenty, IF it happens, the only people who will care are the ones that would never vote for a Repub anyway.
LOL, fletch, that puts an end to the “lying Wellstone” rants, I’m sure.
Trouble PawLenty has enough to do here at home. be nice if he were around to do it. I don’t include the trip to Iraq in that, BTW, if you are going to support a conflict overseas in politics you should at least once have to put on a flak jacket and eat with the troops over there.
Mike K says:
March 15th, 2007 at 8:31 am
Why is it so difficult for liberals to mount an articulate, well thought-out argument without resorting to name calling?
—–
EB writes “be a way to mend fences with the McCainiacs”
___
Mark, Count the number of slurs against conservatives on this blog and reconsider your statement.
Les, are you claiming that referring to McCain supporters as “McCainiacs” is a slur against conservatives?
Hey BT:
What about unemployement? What about personal savings/wealth? How about home ownership?
Yes, the Dow is plugging along nicely butdon’t overlook the dozens of other factors when measuring the strength of the economy.
If Gov. Timmy accepts the St McCain VP slot, how many conservative Repubs will hold the “pledge” against him and not vote for the ticket because of it? None.
And how many demonic MN lib’ruls will vote for St McCain and young Tim because their governor is on the Repub ticket? None.
So I guess it’s an question for our “independents”, and often these kind of broken “pledges”, opportunism and quasi-hypocrisy seem to make a difference to them.
I say, Run, Timmy, Run!!—’08 is gonna be a great, great year to be on the Repub presidential ticket! Your chance may never come again!
Umm Phoenix Chick - I am capable of being critical of both parties. I think Bush is a lousy president and Bachman isn’t the sharpest knife in the drawer (although compared to Wetterling… tough call). I have a different brainless Congresswoman for my Rep. - Leftie McCollum.
Pawlenty has done a solid job as governor. I think the fact that he won reelection during an otherwise Democrat landslide election speaks for itself. I am glad he is around the keep the DFL’s insatiable spending desires in check and think the post of VP would be an utter waste of his time. Am I the only one that is just floored at all the spending plans the DFL has put forward? Wow, just letting the State budget grow at about twice the rate of inflation over the last four years was really tough on them and their ‘friends’. Can you imagine what kind of tax hikes we’de be looking at if Hatch had won?!! Oh that’s right - it would only be on the ‘rich’ (that is - singles making more than 70k and families above 120k) The same people that already pay for like 80% of the cost of the STate. Pawlenty isn’t perfect but he keeps the DFL spend thrifts in their cage. Thank goodness.
Now, pay attention. There is a well thought out, well written comment. Nice observation, Jim.
Agreed, but for some reason, I don’t think Jim is a liberal.
Robert Grant, please continue to post here you speak for more than yourself!
Contrary to the pundits, when McCain is done, so is Pawlenty. If the status quo holds true, and Guilliani wins the nomination, his running mate will be more on the conservative side. And Tim Pawlenty is just a Republican In Name Only, and he certainly is no conservative.
Thank you.
I still say that if TPaw got in the race he might be the GOP front runner in very short order, for the number 1 job. That train will be leaving soon, though.
That VP job isn’t the choicest one in Washington - some people have aruged that if the party asked TPaw to be number 2, it would be hard for him to decline, but I don’t think it would.
Bush senior is the only VP in recent memory to be promoted to the top spot - Nixon’s took a break, Johnson was a sitting president, Truman was a sitting president, VPs don’t have the best luck getting that promotion.
And hasn’t McCain already said that he’d decline the number 2 spot with some quip like “I’ve already been a prisoner of war, why would I want to do that again?”
And the economy is not strong. The Dow is not how you measure the strength of the economy. We must consider that it’s being propped up by a war, which is a primary factor making it look better than it is. Personal spending is greater than personal earning, budget deficits are up, the debt is up, the distribution of income is skewed more and more towards a tiny number controling a majority of the wealth and services which support the weakest link in our economy are being slashed at the federal, state and local level. Another point is look at the housing market. And don’t even get me started about the long-term outlook considering how much faster than inflation the cost of healthcare, education and transportion is going up.
Don’t get me wrong, it could be worse. Also, don’t get me wrong - presidents have almost nothing to do with how good the economy is. We could talk about whether particular policies meant to improve the economy have worked or not, I would argue that they have not, but there is an argument to be had there. But giving credit or blame to an administration for the state of the economy just isn’t really realistic, IMO.
Mike and Robert, your friends over at Powerline told us yesterday how the economy is going to crash on the subprime deals. Two weeks ago the stock market lost 3% when Feds warned that out-of-control government spending should be taken as a dire warning. The President says the economy is doing fine using increasing tax revenues as the measure but fails to mention that over 90% of that increase in tax revenues came from corporations. The working class (i.e. people who vote) lost real wages to inflation. Social Security is not so secure any more and the discussion about what to do is anything but social.
All these things are going to land in the lap of the next president who will have to make the unpopular decisions that this president and congress refuse to do.
Even if we elected God Himself in 2008 He would only serve one term.
Tim P makes me think of Joseph Heller’s Catch 22 character: Lt. Scheiskopf at the start, Gen. Scheiskopf at the end, and the only real talent he showed was organizing parades.
What about a McCain - Kline ticket?
Economy is VERY strong. Agreed that one President doesn’t have complete control over the economy but their policies and appointments INFLUENCE the economy. Some of your points are worthy of discussion such as budget deficits and housing.
I thought Hillary was going to fix healthcare? It must have been the vast right-wing conspiracy that prevented her from living up to her promise. Maybe next time around she’ll be able to do it but it looks like she’s already making excuses since she recently brought up the vast right-wing conspircay theory again.
Rich:
The issues you bring up are certainly not new. They’ve been passed from President to President for decades. Some of the issues you mention might not ever result in any serious problems. Some might. But its unlikely that there is going to be this catastrophic next term where all the stars align to destroy American will.
Historically Americans have overcome insurmountable challenges. Don’t ever discount our will and enginuity.
Eric,
I like it! Little Timmy as Lt. Scheiskopf.
But McCain-Kline? Wouldn’t that be like Col. Klink and Sgt. Schultz?
Robert & Mike - I know you guys have drunk the kool-aid on this President, but he *has* screwed up the economy. Believe it or not, there are other factors to look at than the Dow.
The personal savings rate was NEGATIVE last year. People actually dipped into savings and spent more than they earned. This has only happened in two previous years (1932 & 1933 — during the Great Depression).
The Federal Budget Deficit is something around $300 million — even though this president came into office with a *surplus* of $284 billion. The five largest deficits in history are during the administrations of GWB, GWB, GWB, GWB & GHWB, respectively. How this is the party of fiscal responsibility is totally beyond me.
The number of Americans living in ’severe poverty’ ($9,903/yr for a family of four) is at a 32yr high. It was at a 26yr low when Bush came into office.
I could go on.
—
By the way, Mike, I don’t see how you can say “Why is it so difficult for liberals to mount an articulate, well thought-out argument without resorting to name calling?” with a straight face. It only took Robert until the third post on this thread to call people “idiots”. Remind me, is he a liberal or a conservative?
This is a minor point, but the Civil War general quated was named William Tecumpseh Sherman, not George.
Rich,
I think we can both agree on one thing. We see thing’s very differently. Using your logic, one should sit back in the fetal position because at any time, the ax can fall. The negativity you lead with is un-healthy fiscally, emotionally, and can be contagious if you let it be. you can submit any data you choose to spin an economy in whatever light you care to. Your reference to the working class is your own generalization. What defines “working class?” I’m what some may consider “old”, and I have heard concerns about the stability of S.S. for as long as I can remember. That has alway’s been an easy bullet point to revert back to for the “gosh, ain’t it awful” attitude that is almost alway’s used by Democrats. How can you (democrats) justify raising taxes on so many fronts during a surplus, and your response most certainly will be, that surplus is false. You can’t continue to suggest non U.S. citizens be allowed to vote (Kahn) to assure spots in targeted precincts (Ellison). Eventually, you will be smoked out.
Ron:
I don’t speak for Robert or anyone else.
Although you attempted to make an articulate argument you started out by insulting both of us with the Kool-Aid comment.
Comments noted, Ron.
The point of the kool-aid comment is simply that you will not let facts get in the way of your loyalty. I think that’s a fair assessment of the situation, actually.
Ron,
If I read a Bible verse to 30 different people in seperate closed locations, and asked them to intrepet the message, according to you, they would all be the same. That’s MY assessment.
When we generalize and label an argument as liberal or conservative it is easier to ignore a viable alternative.
“The Federal Budget Deficit is something around $300 million ”
Whenever someone uses nominal data to try and make a point you know they are trying to BS you. The same is for non-seasonally adjusted data that Dora tried to pass on a while ago. The DEFICIT may be the HIGHEST but so is the GDP and so is total tax revenue, and so is total spending.
“The number of Americans living in ’severe poverty’ ($9,903/yr for a family of four) is at a 32yr high.”
Again, the RAW number. Who cares about that. Clearly 70 years ago the problem of SEVERE POVERTY was much worse. TO go to such lengths to make it seem so bad only fools idiots, i.e. the rank and file of the Democratic Party.
As for TPaw running for Veep, you need to ignore what he is personally and analyze what would be a potential GOP nominees reason for selection.
THe typical reasons for selecting a VP are 1. ticket splitting 2. geographical coverage and/or 3. party consolidation. WIth the Republican nominees I do not see TPaw filling any of these needs.
The three front runners, Guiliani, McCain, and Romney all seem to need a somewhat conservative southerner. I also could see winner of these three picking either Guiliani or McCain for party consolidation (but not Romney who as a governer is not a typical VP selection and would have the Morman issue as some baggage).
For both McCain and Guiliani the most practical choice would be a person like Fred Thompson. A better choice from the govenors ranks for all of the front runners would be Mark Sandford of SC.
I’ve been a strong Republican for 30 years, and my inital reactions to Pawlenty’s early Presidential- and recent Vice Presidential- aspirations were “Thank God, if it gets him out of Minnesota”.
Reality has set in, and I find the prospect of Pawlenty second in command to an elderly President extremely frightening.
He offers the nation, party, and ticket no viable intellecutal substance economically, militarily, administratively, nor culturally.
The USA deserves better. There are better-qualified men and women to uphold the office.
Please don’t name him, Sen. McCain. America will never forgive nor elect you.
T-Paw is not going to get the chance. He has picked the wrong horse.
Ok, Mark, let’s look at a graph of Debt as a percentage of GDP, since that’s valid analysis according to you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._public_debt
You’ll notice it went way up during the 80s. Went down from 1995-2000, and now is going back up. I wonder whose administrations those correspond to…
As I recalled, last year everybody was waiting with bated breath for Senator McCain to pick Governor Pawlenty as his running mate for VP. Former Dakota County Judge Mary Pawlenty resigned from the bench so she could compaign with her husband. Suddenly Governor Pawlenty as too focused on his job to be Senator McCain’s VP. Why?
And, yes, severe poverty was a bigger problem 70 years ago. I never said it wasn’t. I said it was at a 32 year high. Or didn’t you read that part?
This last congress proved that Republicans can’t keep a lid on spending and earmarks (the bridge to nowhere, etc), they’re just good at borrowing.
Pawlenty would be a tough pick. He’s too young, possibly vulnerable to a Dan Quayle type attack. Also, does anyone know him outside MN?
Tim,
I’m very surprised to hear comments like that from you.
Sorry, Mike K., didn’t mean to offend.
Tim,
Shoot me an email if you’re who I think you are.
I’m not sure what the issue is here… if you were in the Governor’s shoes and were asked to run for VP, would you not consider it? The Gov is committed to this state - he made this statement knowing that no one has offered him a shot a running for VP. If the Gov were a Dem, then all the negative comments …. would probably be coming from Republicans. It’s a two way street.
A VP candidate is rarely a reason to vote for a ticket. Though, it can be a reason to vote against one (eg. Dan Quayle). Of the assets listed in the article, the fact that he comes from a purple state is the only one that strikes me as at all useful. In other words, would he help McCain carry Minnesota?
Our economy is a house of cards just waiting to collapse. An increase in gas prices is all that needs to happen, or a decline in foreign support for our reckless, out of control borrowing.
As Ronald Bandor points out, the national personal savings rate has been negative for two years running—last time this happened was during the Great Depression.
This reckless administration and Repub Congress increased our national debt by over 50% in just six years—and this during a supposed expansion! The national debt (currenetly 8.2 trillion) will likely be around $10.5 trillion when the current clowns leave office.
As everyone knows, the economy is slowing down, the housing market (which heavily drove the “expansion”) has collapsed, and mortgage forclosures have already hit the levels they were at by the end of the last recession–before our upcoming recession has even hit!
The numbers of forclosures and bankruptcies we will be seeing will be incredible. The Dow will continue its fall.
BushAmerica has been surviving on a fake housing boom (generated by absurdly manipulated interest rates) and by the military spending glut from George’s Iraq Adventure. Those are going to be coming to an end, and with them the “great” Bushco economy of cards.
We are a nation and a people awash in debt, utterly dependent upon the “kindness” of our creditors China and Japan. When the dust settles, we may conclude that the Repubs’ “conservative” economic policies were even more foolish and rash than their militarist foreign policy in bringing about our national decline.
Whoops–make that $8.84 Trillion for the current national debt. Hard to keep up!
euzoius,
If you truly believe our economy is a “house of cards” and will fail if gasoline prices increase, you should be proactive, and contact the Democratic party and suggest they omit the recommendation to add a .10 cent per gallon gas tax unless you can explain how this will stabalize or even lower prices. I will certainly follow Al gore’s suggestion to “go green” to do my part, but increasing my monthly electrical usage by 2000%….I’m still unsure.
Giulani is a womanizing, cross-dressing hack. He gets credit for doing what any mayor with more than 3 brain cells (sorry dems) would do in such a time of crisis. I mean, if a great big meteor crashed from the sky into Podunk, Idaho, that there mayor would be the new national hero, on to protect our great country from all the dangers that lurk out there as President of the US of A.
euzoius writes
“The numbers of forclosures and bankruptcies we will be seeing will be incredible. The Dow will continue its fall.”
That’s a possibility, but not necessarily a foregone conclusion. The markets have a way of behaving in ways that defy prediction.
Then ezious says
“BushAmerica has been surviving on a fake housing boom (generated by absurdly manipulated interest rates)…”
That is not quite true. The housing boom & unprecedented rise in home ownership is not necessarily a result of low interest rates, as much as of the prevalence of what I’ll call untraditional mortgages. The foreclosure boom is not a result of people acquiring mortgages with too low interest rates, it is a result of too many high-risk mortgages. In addition to the interest only loans, the ‘teaser’ loans with low interest for a couple years that jump later and the so-called ‘liar loans’ where you don’t have to demonstrate income are far more to blame than the allegedly ‘absurdly manipulated’ interest rates.
Fletch,
You mean like the hero status Ray Nagin was able to achieve after the “chocolate city” comments? I’m confused by your comments.
Half the families in the US make less than $35,000 a year
Real wages have gone down for 5 straight years
The US Gov doesn’t use energy (gas) cost or health care cost when figuring the inflation rate
The US poverty rate has increased 5 straight years
The stock market is great for those of us with a 401k or who own stock but we’re in the minority
Spectacular job at missing the point and failing to actually address my observations, Robert G.
One cannot hold up a house of cards, whatever one does.
BTW, a single state’s increase in the gas tax will not raise the national price of gas, nor would a 10 cent increase be substantial. Think $1.00 a gallon, or an attack on Iran, a project near and dear to conservative hearts.
euzoius is right. China and Japan could decide to stop buying our debt. If you cant figure out what that would do to intrest rates and inflation then you need to spend time thinking about it. They could cause a serious economic and political crisis. How are we suppossed to bring democracy to the middle east and provide basic services to the Baby Boomers if China and Japan decide to stop storing their money in our T Bills?
To clarify,
Is my salary, commission, stock options, or bonus “real wages,” or would those be considered “fake?” If they are real, is it up to me to support the lower 50%, or should I focus on reducing the poverty rate?
Real wages are wages adjusted for inflation. So Robert your’ wages are “real” only as they compare to others in todays marketplace. Arent you tired of complaining about liberals after 6 solid hours? 6:14? Come one. Do something productive with your’ day.
euzoius,
Ask a coherent direct question, and I’ll offer my opinion.
Mark,
We would then offset a breach by setting in place an embargo.
Real wages are just that; an hourly wage. A vast majority of Americans are hourly workers.
Robert G you should consider stand up comedy. You’re hilarious!!
“Giulani is a womanizing, cross-dressing hack. He gets credit for doing what any mayor with more than 3 brain cells (sorry dems) would do in such a time of crisis.”
I agreed!!! Not sure so many idiots would give him so much credits. Anybody would have done the same thing. He can’t even solve his marriage problem. How could he even solve any problem in the state/States?
I’m neither a Dem nor Republican so don’t think I’m picking the Republicans. It just happens that they all are crooks and arogant bastards in this administration.
mark,
Maybe I’m in my office, and have been since 5:00a.m. Maybe I’m making decisions that will directly or indirectly effect you. Maybe I’m working on defense contracts that will help maximize the safety of our soldiers in a very un-safe place. In any event, what do you care. If you don’t agree or like anything I have to say, go ahead and submit a comment. To me mark, you are a non factor in my life, so if I choose to post comments here until 1:00 a.m., I really am not concerned with what you have to say. I can choose to use the intelligent ideas to my benifit, or dismiss any I don’t find helpful. But, either way, thanks for your concerns.
Thien writes
“It just happens that they all are crooks and arogant bastards in this administration.”
What’s the over/under on Gonzales these days? Is he still in office on Monday? How about next Friday?
So easily flustered. For a person who called us all idiots you can’t take much can you? Ive read this blog enough times to know how you think. I just happen to consider you a comedian. If I’m so inconsequential to you what do YOU care. Perhaps Im conducting my own research.
mark,
I’m an open book. If it’s research you’d like, go ahead and form an intelligent line of questions, and I’ll be happy to engage in a debate. I’m far from flustered, however.
“What’s the over/under on Gonzales these days?”
I’d bet a six-pack of listerine Gonzales will be pounding tortillas come Tuesday.
Oh, and I was referring to Bill and DJ, not all. Be precise, so we can avoid contridictions.
Fletch,
Do you remember a few years back when Fuzzy Zoeller lost millions in sponsorships because he suggested Tiger Woods order fried chicken or “whatever else those people eat” prior to winning the Masters? Why did you select tortillas for Gonzales?
Quick Robert G! Find the contradiction in this paragraph “You people are idiots. You subscribe to a failing Newspaper with out of touch “journalists” and a liberal, hate filled agenda. Before you ask, this is why I enjoy confronting you, and asking for your solutions. FYI, an recommendation for a solution should not begin with, “It’s the dirty, Reupublican’s fault.”
I don’t see a contridiction in that statement, just a couple of typo’s.
I think it’s great if he becomes Vice-President. After Cheney is out of office I’m very sure of the fact that the VP’s role will be drastically reduced, if not by the new president, it will be done by Congress. If Pawlenty becomes VP then the citizens of the great state of Minnesota will not have to put up with his lies and new taxes (see cigarette taxes) to balance his budget then create a surplus to which he has no intention of returning to those he stole from, instead he would rather use that money to help subsidize a company in his old stomping grounds that has clearly made an effort to ship jobs overseas (see Thompson West).
Pawlenty for Vice-President!
Oh, and I forgot to mention that Thompson West executives contributed heavily toward his narrow victory in the past election.
You ask “idiots” not to begin their posts with insults when they offer solutions. You opened your’ post with an insult. Maybe hypocritical would have been a better choice of words.
Yes. That would have been the adjective.
If you want to split hairs. Find the Hypocracy then….
Don’t think I’m avoiding you, but I need to meet with a few people. I’ll be back.
I think you have an unhealthy sense of your’ own importance. No one cares if you leave. Please, by all means avoid me. By the way, Im going to get a snack. Ill be back real soon….
So if Gov is “commited to serving as the Governor of Minnesota” why is he in Iowa promoting McCain as a national presidential candidate while the Minnesota town of BrownsValley is suffering from it’s worst flood situation in 40+ years? It seems to me he is promoting himself instead of serving the people of Minensota.
I don’t understand the fascination with TP.
He hasn’t really done anything except break promises–has he? I mean I hear people talk about his work on the budget, but at the same time he was “holding the line on state taxation” he cut local government aid so my property tax bill shot through the roof.
What’s the attraction for conservatives, besides the little “R” next to his name?
He’s broken your hearts, every time. Right after his re-election (by an embarrassingly narrow margin) he turns around and tries to turn “health care into a human right” for Minnesota’s children–straight to the left; the kind of thing that gives you guys a heart attack when a liberal does it.
You learned all you needed to know about Pawlenty when he was in the state house. Time and time again he did his best to kill the stadiums, as “a matter of principle.” Once he hits the governor’s mansion, he’ pro-stadium, because adhering to priniciple and losing the franchise would make him unpopular. He’s a worm, like Norm Coleman.
He’s a nothing man, a hack taking his little crap telemarketing money and refusing to make his tax records public. If he’s McCain’s running mate, you have to acknowledge that McCain is likely to die in office and we’ll have another GOP non-entity in the White House. The United States can’t afford another GOP non-entity in the White House, no matter how you feel about your goddam taxes. We need a person with brains and experience running the White House–we desperately need that, not another telegenic hack politician.
Are MN conservatives ever going to back an actual leader for office again, or is that all over, forever? Is it strictly about electability and talk radio political fantasies for you guys, now?
Bill P writes
“I don’t understand the fascination with TP.”
Bill, the fascination lies not so much in TP himself, but in his uncanny ability to explain the difference between a fee and a tax. Clearly he’s a politician that does nuance.
Bill, would you honestly rather pay higher taxes to support the state/national levels? Or pay higher property taxes to support your local municipality/schools from which you see the greatest benefit first-hand?
You also refuse to accept the notion that Pawlenty, faced with a forcasted budget surplus rather than a deficit, proposed children’s healthcare a financial possibility. When my family has extra money, we are free to spend more on things we want/need. How about yours?
Good news Mark,
I’m back, but because of your hurtful comments, I’ve decided to leave for the day. See if you can come up with anything intelligent to discuss tomorrow.
Thanks pal
Public debt as a percentage of GDP is at the lower end of the historical levels of debt for the past 45 years. The public held debt to GDP ratio is 37% which is very much near its historical average over these decades.
In fact, it was higher in the early 60’s (43.7%) than it is today. It reached it lowest levels in the 1970’s, a time of economic stagnation for the country. Does anyone know why the public debt was so sharply reduced in the 1970’s?
The consistent reporting of total debt is another ridiculous economic position to take. Total debt also includes the debt held by the government itself, and it is a very meaningless number. Ifyou owe yourself money it has absolutely no economic impact at all. At best it is just an economic gimmac.
“As Ronald Bandor points out, the national personal savings rate has been negative for two years running—last time this happened was during the Great Depression.”
This is another joke. Surely you are aware that the net worth of American households are also at an all time high. The savings rate is a bogus number trotted out to make things look bad. The fact is, that as your assets increase (home values, 401(k) portfolios, and other assets) your savings, as defined by this measure [which is simply net earnings-net spending] will decline. This is an economic fact.
And, if foreign entities stop buying US bonds then that will mean that the trade surpluses that they currently run will be reduced or eliminated. The economic impact of decreased trade in the US means that their economies will suffer, probably in much more severe terms than in the United States (we could just adjust our fiscal position slightly).
The limited understanding of the common person about trade is very sad. When a country sells a product/service to the United States they receive US dollars. The only thing that you can do with a US dollar is buy a US product, buy a US service, or buy an asset from the United States. The countries you speak of run massive trade surpluses with the United States and they are not going to cause the economic devastation to their own economies that you talk about.
“he cut local government aid so my property tax bill shot through the roof.”
So, you think that the areas of the other parts of the state should be sending their tax dollars to your local government to keep YOUR local taxes low and that you can afford more local government than your locality can afford? What a nice position that is.
Further, if you really, really think that local governments are suffering go around the state and look. For example, go look up in the northern suburb of Ramsey and the brand new Taj Mahal they are building or have just recently built as their city hall.
Or, when you hear about how the schools are suffering from lack of funding, go out and tour some local schools like Eden Prarie. Go tour the state of the art athletic facilities the high school built in Elk River, were the local paper once ran an article about these new facilities right next to an article that was supporting the tax increase referendum to support the schools because they lack money.
Before you let the “local government” and school completely CON you into how they need more money, go and see how they spend money. Go look at their budgets and see if they are really “tightening” their belts and you will find that the beauracrats that run these entities are CON ARTISTS intent on maximizing their budgets and that we unfortunately let them get away with it.
Not the point, Jay–not here to argue tax policy with you–here to talk about why conservatives continue to puff TP for VP.
He’s another weather vane; no principles, does the thing calculated to shore up his base and/or get him the most votes (and screw his base, if he gets more votes by dumping them). What is the appeal of a person like that, to MN conservatives–of a guy who both acknowledge saddles us with tax increases so he can spend more of our tax dollars on social engineering that conservatives oppose?
It makes MN conservatives look stupid and powerless, when they continue to vote for a non-principled politician who betrays them because they can’t come up with a principled conservative who can win.
And the main point, which you missed: because of McCain’s age, there is every possibility that this unprincipled party hack nobody could end up as a wartime president. My opinion, and my point: we can’t afford another third-rate Republican with no character in the White House now.
“we can’t afford another third-rate Republican with no character in the White House now. ”
AS opposed to a 4th rate Democrat who is a complete fool.
Mark repeats the same illogical arguments with
“The consistent reporting of total debt is another ridiculous economic position to take. Total debt also includes the debt held by the government itself, and it is a very meaningless number. Ifyou owe yourself money it has absolutely no economic impact at all. At best it is just an economic gimmac.”
Why do you continue to pretend that money borrowed now will not have to be paid back later? A T-Bill is a liability independant of by whom it is held.
I suspect your confusion lies in the misunderstand in the last sentence “If you owe yourself money it has absolutely no economic impact at all.” This statement demonstrates the delusion that the social security trust fund is equivalent to the ‘general fund’ that makes up the rest of the budget. This is clearly not the case however, as the social security administration collects & spends money independant of the federal budget. Because they collect more than they spend - for the time being - they loan money to the fed gov’t so the Congress can pay soldiers and build unnecessary bridges. Pretending that this money doesn’t have to be paid back is economically irresponsible. Its the Wimpy budget, “I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/03/its_way_to_soon_to_count_out_m.html
March 15, 2007
McCain is in Trouble, but It’s Still Early
By Gerard Baker
Zero times zero is still zero, even in politics.
“AS opposed to a 4th rate Democrat who is a complete fool.”
Nice shot! You showed him!
Of course Pawlenty would run as VP … if asked.
But the question is whether Gulliani or Mitt Romney would ask. I think McCain is a sinking ship who will not get the nomination. The evangelicals still don’t embrace him … even though he’s tried to cozy up. The people who thought he was a maverick got burned when he cozied up to Bush and the evangelicals. I used to like McCain, but no more. He’s yesterday’s news.
So will Pawlenty accept the VP spot? That depends on Gulliani, Romney or a surprise GOP nominee.
“Nice shot! You showed him!”
No, he will counter with a 5th rate…………
“Total debt also includes the debt held by the government itself, and it is a very meaningless number.”
If its meaningless, why do they bother with it at all?
“So will Pawlenty accept the VP spot? That depends on Gulliani, Romney or a surprise GOP nominee.”
The lists of dark horses are growing. This Ron Paul (did I remember that accurately?) guy is interesting.
“If its meaningless, why do they bother with it at all? ”
Because there is a pretend thing called the “LOCK BOX” which holds promises of the govrernment ot pay itself.
“This Ron Paul (did I remember that accurately?) guy is interesting. ”
Are you serious?
“Because there is a pretend thing called the “LOCK BOX” which holds promises of the govrernment ot pay itself.”
Well, clearly its a pretend thing, as its obviously not locked. I hear this ‘lockbox’ is full of IOUs. Why would they track a bunch of IOUs?
“Are you serious?”
Why wouldn’t I be?
Mark amusingly tries to explain that being weighed down with personal and national debt is really a fabuluous proposition—We should’ve thought of becoming an enormous debtor nation years ago! Well, we’re sure going to see, aren’t we?
Why didn’t conservatives pitch this fiscal imprudence line to us before? Rest assured, reckless fiscal policy always turns out badly, and so will this.
And Economists definitely created the personal saving rate as a “bogus number to trot out to make [conservatives] look bad”. Yep, that’s what it exists for.
“Why wouldn’t I be? ”
Do you know anything about him?
What I know about him is interesting. He’s a small government, anti-war candidate. Of his positions that I’m aware of, we disagree primarily on abortion, which for me isn’t a factor in picking a presidential candidate to support.
“We should’ve thought of becoming an enormous debtor nation years ago!”
You do realize that a large public debt has always been the case. During WWII the debt as a percentage of GDP was as high as 120%. That histoically in the last century plus a federal budget surplus is a very rare event.
“And Economists definitely created the personal saving rate as a “bogus number to trot out to make [conservatives] look bad”. Yep, that’s what it exists for. ”
It is a very simple measure that has very limited analytical value. Again, as your other assets increase in value you will SAVE less simply because of the limited defintiion of this measure.
So no one here has any kind words for Timmy’s character or “principled GOP conservatism?” It’s all party loyalty?
That’s really sad, when you consider McCain’s age and TP’s mediocrity. What the US ever do to you guys, that you would settle for a guy like TP in the White House? Is it really all about electability and your taxes? Doesn’t fighting the war on terror even matter, the fate of our citizens and troops even matter, for you GOP voters?
This is the Presidency of the United States we’re talking about, and we’re at war. Do you really think that Tim Pawlenty is the best qualified statesman in America, today?
Total national debt–a “meaningless” number
Negative savings rate–a “bogus” number.
See the pattern? If an economic fact is unfavorable, it’s irrelevant, or (better) only “fools” would pay attention to it, and not the brilliant conservatives in their hermetic world of “expert” understanding.
“Do you really think that Tim Pawlenty is the best qualified statesman in America, today? ”
I guess this is a relative statement. I would put him in the middle of the pack, at best. However, everyone’s definition of qualified and medicocirty is different. I would put Pawlenty’s statemanship much higher than any of the Democratic front runners.
Bill asks
“Is it really all about electability and your taxes?”
This is a non-sequiter, but there’s a new Robert Novak column touting Tom DeLay’s new book, in which he (DeLay) crucifies The Newt, Dick Armey & George Bush. There was something about The Newt’s moral failings, and GW being ‘too compassionate - and not conservative enough’ (I paraphrase, though its near a direct quote).
So, yes, it would seem, for some, electability & cutting taxes (and gerrymandering a permanent Republican majority) are all that matters, consequences be damned.
“Do you really think that Tim Pawlenty is the best qualified statesman in America, today? ”
Mark: “I guess this is a relative statement. I would put him in the middle of the pack, at best.”
Not the best endorsement for the White House, Mark.
“However, everyone’s definition of qualified and medicocirty is different.”
TP would meet most political observers definition of mediocrity. He met yours.
” I would put Pawlenty’s statemanship much higher than any of the Democratic front runners.”
A strange conclusion. You rate him ahead of the Clintons, when it comes to conducting foreign policy, eh? And I know you are a student of history, Mark. Tut tut.
This is what I mean: if it comes down to a conflict between the purely partisan v. backing a qualified leader for your country in a time of crisis–ye shall be able to separate ye pundit sheep from ye pundit goats, blindfolded.
“Total national debt–a “meaningless” number
Negative savings rate–a “bogus” number.
See the pattern? If an economic fact is unfavorable, it’s irrelevant, or (better) only “fools” would pay attention to it, and not the brilliant conservatives in their hermetic world of “expert” understanding. ”
Exactly. That you would argue otherwise only shows that you really do not have any understanding of these economic statistics and what they mean.
As your wealth increases you will “save” less. That is an economic fact and to disagree with this is rather foolish.
Example, you made $35,000 last year and saved $5,000. This means that you spent $30,000.
The following year you inhereted $250,000. Your income was again $35,000 but you spent all of it. The “SAVINGS RATE” has now decreased $5,000. Your net worth increased by 50 times the rate it did the previous year, but your savings rate declined.
Anyone who knows anything realizes that the most important statistic of this type is the analysis of real household net worth. Real household net worth has hit a new all time high and has a real rate of growth of more than 4% per year for the past several years.
“You rate him ahead of the Clintons, when it comes to conducting foreign policy”
Sure, a total unknown is better than Bill or Hillary’s proven positions and policies.
“Anyone who knows anything realizes that the most important statistic of this type is the analysis of real household net worth. Real household net worth has hit a new all time high and has a real rate of growth of more than 4% per year for the past several years.”
So, if I spend more than I earn in order to buy a house that’s overvalued thanks to the real estate bubble, I’m doing fabulously?
I suppose such a strategy works, as long as 1) the house appreciates faster than spending and 2) a person recognizes when to cash out the equity in that house & stick it somewhere safe before the market crashes. I would hardly call this a sound fiscal plan.
“So, if I spend more than I earn in order to buy a house that’s overvalued thanks to the real estate bubble”
You are really reaching with this example and it really shows you do not have much knowledge of the statistics and their meaning.
If you buy a house using a mortgage and a down payment you are not spending based on the definition of spending used in the famous “Savings Rate” statistic. Further, when you buy the house your net worth does not change. You are simply shifting how your net worth is distributed. Before you had “savings” that that was cash/cd’s and now you have a like amount that is “home equity”.
“I suppose such a strategy works”
I am not sure what you are talking about here and it really seems like gibberish.
Spending money on a house is a very important decision that hs nothing to do with your “strategy” you outline. Your home has a value that is separate from the financial issues at hand that is the predominate interst in owning a home.
>Exactly. That you would argue otherwise only shows that you really do not have any understanding of these economic statistics and what they mean.
>As your wealth increases you will “save” less. That is an economic fact and to disagree with this is rather foolish.
Yes, that’s why the only other time the savings rate has been negative is 1932-1933. Because that’s the only other time the economy has been so good, like it is today. Brilliant.
Well, Ron B proved he has mastered the art of cut and paste. Nice job.
“Yes, that’s why the only other time the savings rate has been negative is 1932-1933. Because that’s the only other time the economy has been so good, like it is today. Brilliant. ”
Snore. Of course, the fact that there was 25% unemployment and a severe depression does not mean anything to you. It is a completely meaningless comparison.
Ah, yes, those wealthy Americans, with a new consumption “lifestyle” of annually spending more than they earn, taking comfort in the wealth effect caused by an unsustainable asset bubble, now starting to burst.
Look out below.
“those wealthy Americans, with a new consumption “lifestyle” of annually spending more than they earn, taking comfort in the wealth effect caused by an unsustainable asset bubble, now starting to burst”
Sounds like a bit of jealousy, no actually a lot of jealousy speaking in those statements. OF course, your level of economic analysis is well founded in calling for this “bubble”. If you really believe it then what you should be doing right now is short selling the stock market and reaping big profits from this asset bubble bursting. Put your money were your mouth is.
>As your wealth increases you will “save” less. That is an economic fact and to disagree with this is rather foolish.
Oh-wise-one, please explain to us why this negative savings rate (which is a good thing in your universe), has only happened now and in the Great Depression. We’ve never been better off than we are now?
Why do I have a feeling that if the sun went cold, you’d argue that it was a good thing — and only the result of the brilliant planners at the White House?
“please explain to us why this negative savings rate (which is a good thing in your universe), has only happened now and in the Great Depression. We’ve never been better off than we are now?”
WHy this is a “good” thing? I never necessarily said that it was a “good thing” or a “bad thing”. What I have indicated was that the “savings” rate is not a very good measure of anything.
In general, I would argue, that the “negative” savings rate in this case is actually a GOOD thing because when coupled with other data shows that the most likely cause of the low or negative “savings” rate is the wealth effect.
Lets reveiw. Net savings is defined in a very simple manner as income minus spending. Net wealth is defined as assets minus liabilities. Savings increases your wealth and lowers your current spending. You save so that you can spend at some other time (otherwise savings have no economic value to you).
As you get MORE of something the marginal utility to you declines. THis is the same for wealth. AS you get MORE wealth the marginal value of adding more to this amount gets smaller. Therefore you would substitute other economic activities instead of increasing wealth, and the other alternative is more current consumption.
Couple this with the generaly low interest rates means that the value of savings versus spending is not that significant.
The Great Depression “negative” savings rate was obviously an income effect. Given such dire economic conditions as people faced in the Great Depression the utility of current spending was nearly infinite for a many reasons, the most important two being that many households could not even afford necessities like food and shelter and that the financial crisis of the time placed any savings at risk.
This is economics 101 and these concepts are immutable. Arguing against them is a ridiculous proposition and it is really telling that you continuously do so. I enjoy laughing at you people and your statements and persistent publically revealed ignorance makes it all the more enjoyable.
Mark says
“You are really reaching with this example and it really shows you do not have much knowledge of the statistics and their meaning.”
Well, its the best I could do off the top of my head. I offered the example as a counterpoint to your example of everyone inheriting a quarter of a million dollars as an explanation for growth in net worth combined with a negative savings rate.
If people are spending more than they’re earning; i.e. a ‘negative savings rate’ but their net worth is improving, some asset they have must be increasing in value. The obvious guess, to me anyway, was home values. You’re saying home values aren’t included in net worth? That seems odd to me, given that most of us have negative net worth, until our home values are considered. If an increase in net worth is not due to increasing home values, to what do we attribute this change?
“You’re saying home values aren’t included in net worth? ”
I never said that home values are not included in net worth, and home values are very important factors in most household’s net worth.
But that is just one component and just one reason why household net worth is increasing. In fact, real household net worth increased more in real terms in 2006 than in 2005 even though the housing market was not performing well.
The scares in teh sub-prime lending market are not good economic news, but hardly the precursor to the long anticipated equity bubble. Here is one guy’s take:
However, most of the scare mongers are missing a key point. The Federal Reserve has raised interest rates for three years now from a Fed Fund rate of 1.25% to the current 5.25%. Any housing market problems can be eased by reducing rates and there is obviously plenty of room to go down now.
If this was June 2004 and we were facing this crisis while the Fed Fund Rate was 1.25% I would say we were in a severe crisis because there would not be a way to fix the issue monetarily. If the Fed reduced rates by 50 basis points in their next meeting the talk of a such scares would fade away.
“However, most of the scare mongers are missing a key point. The Federal Reserve has raised interest rates for three years now from a Fed Fund rate of 1.25% to the current 5.25%. Any housing market problems can be eased by reducing rates and there is obviously plenty of room to go down now.”
I admit, in advance, that I haven’t paid too much attention to mortgage rates lately. But, my understanding is that they haven’t gone up all that much. How would fed fund rate changes soften a crash in the real estate market caused by a rising default rate in the subprime market?
From where I sit, it looks like a lot of houses are sitting on the market for a long time. I can think of two in my neighborhood that have been listed for 6 to 9 months. I know one of them is a default on a sub-prime loan & the couple that bought the house paid way too much in the first place. Right now, the mortgage company is holding the bag on that house & its looking like they’ll be lucky to recover the outstanding principal, if that.
I think I have to poop.
“I think I have to poop. ”
Just a sign of infantilism or old age. Most people KNOW when they have to poop. Thinking about it does you no good.
“
He may just be gassy.
Fletch wrote:
“Wellstone did keep to his pledge by not ever serving a third term.
Granted, it was with God’s help.”
Pretty pathetic that you find Wellstone’s death amusing - though it’s the kind of humor one expects from Bushbots.
By the way, I doubt that God had anything to do with it.
Hey Nancy,
No, I doubt God had anything to do with it either. It was most likely physics and fate that had something to do with it.
Maybe he shouldn’t have tempted fate by renegging on a promise. Or more likely (because I doubt God is concerned with such trivial matters (as an aside, I would never pull an Edwards and attempt to speak for God)), he was so substantially down in the polls that he was offed by his own party? Consider that and get back to me - I know you will.
But Mondale? Come on, even the Dems can do better than bringing an obsolete marginal politician out of retirement, right?
My next post will be something to the effect of responding to your statistics taken by the Strib before the election. My auto response is move the numbers 10 points toward the Republican and you might fall within the actual margin. Often times more than 10.
Just what would Wellstone do?
After Wellstone’s vote against the IWR, he had pulled ahead of Coleman and was just outside the margin of error.
Wellstone died 11 days before the election the DFL didn’t have a whole lot of time to find a new candidate. Mondale was a good choice as he was known throughout the state and, as I recall, came very close to winning. I would imagine if all the people who had filed absentee ballots for Wellstone had had the time to file a new ballot, Mondale would have won.
As far as politicians claiming they speak for God - what about Bush and Bachmann who both claim that God speaks to them? For that matter, if God were in the business of smiting politicians who lie, I imagine He might go after ones who lie us into a war of choice.
Both your points are easily dismissed - I predicted the one and already dismissed it befre you brought it up. The Star Tribune’s polls are inaccurate by often times more than 10. If the Strib says the Democrat candidate is up by 10, expect the Republican to win by 5 on average. Its just how it goes with them.
Second point, you said Bush and Bachman claim God speaks to them. You’re not even claiming they are trying to speak for God, as I mentioned Edwards recently did. So I gues I don’t understand if you are trying to make a point or distract from the discussion.
Next.
And by the way, are you suggesting you “might” speak for God by imaining what he might do?
John Edwards statement was
“I think Jesus would be disappointed in our ignoring the plight of those around us who are suffering and our focus on our own selfish short-term needs… I think he would be appalled, actually.”
I would take this as a comment on how Edwards interprets what he was taught about Jesus. And, given what I was taught in Catechism, it is a statement I’d be inclined to agree with. The operative words in his statement being “think” and “imagine” at no time did he say he speaks for God, nor for that matter, did I.
However, on July 16, 2004, when speaking to an Amish group Mr. Bush said “God speaks through me.” This was reported in several papers in the Lancaster, PA area.
“publically revealed ignorance”
Great job, Mark. I love the irony of this phrase — particularly when it comes from someone who likes to tell his opposition how dumb they are in just about every one of his posts.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
tamiflu uk shop?
tamiflu medical Tamiflu Related To Pan Epidemic Outbreak tamiflu stomach flu Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. Flu Shoots Baltimore flu treatments without tylenol! philadelphia flu shoots Tamiflu Generic home treatment of the flu tamiflu 60 mg Flu Shoots Copanys relenza vs tamiflu tamiflu hemorrhoid Shelf Life Of Tamiflu tamiflu flu tamiflu dosing instructions Tamiflu Pregnancy Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. acheter tamiflu Does Tamiflu Contraindicate With Acetaminophen what are some treatments of swine flu flu symptoms headache Tylenol Flu Med flu shoots companys stopped tamiflu early Chaep Tamiflu Without Prescription buy tamiflu without a prescription tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; Tamiflu Z-pack tamiflu suspension no prescription tamiflu without a prescribtion Parvo Tamiflu flu medication tamiflu swine flu symptoms and treatments Donald Rumsfeld Tamiflu tamiflu adverse events molen flu shoots 2009 Flu Season Update cdc + swine flu treatment swine flu in ohio Tamiflu Flu tamiflu for bird flu and 2007; tamiflu shelf life Pandemic Flu Home Care Kits tylenol flu night timeflu treatments without tylenol!
H1n1 Swine Flu "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" h1n1 flu symptoms Tamiflu Parov Canine tamiflu alcohol relenza vs tamiflu Homeopathic Treatments For Stomach Flu tamiflu hemorrhoid tamiflu flu Tamiflu Manufacturer tamiflu dosing instructions Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. Whats In Tamiflu acheter tamiflu weaponized swine flu; Buy Tamiflu W No Prescription flu symptoms prilosec flu shoots companys Swine Flu Facts Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. buy tamiflu without a prescription Chilli Cold And Flu Treatment tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; tamiflu suspension no prescription Tamiflu Invent tamiflu without a prescribtion flu masks Tamiflu Oseltamivir Phosphate swine flu symptoms and treatments tamiflu adverse events Flu Strain In Idaho molen flu shoots cdc + swine flu treatment Flu Remedies swine flu in ohio tamiflu flu Flu Prednisone Shot tamiflu shelf life tylenol flu night time Flu Treatment For Children tamiflu and effectiveness and safety tamiflu in dogs! Cheapest Tamiflu tamiflu for only 4 days ingridients of tamiflu Swine Flu Statistics intestinal flunumber needed to treat for tamiflu
Singulair Flu Shot "medwatch form for tamiflu" what if i don't finish tamiflu Natural And Alternative Bird Flu Treatments tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Treatment For The Avian Flu tamiflu tamiflu manufacturer gilliad Stomach Flu Symptoms swine flu mask; panleukopenia and tamiflu Over The Counter Flu Prevention rebate on tamiflu, depo provera flu interfere! Buy Tamiflu Without Prescription tamiflu and seizure swine flu conspiracy Tamiflu Canine Parvovirus aids tamiflu flu; tamiflu nausea Swine Flu In Texas tamiflu invent prevention of flu Latest Reports On Swine Flu chilli cold and flu treatment gilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflu Flu Prevention tamiflu and parvo prophylactic tamiflu Government Tamiflu tamiflu roche swine flu death toll Got Better H1n1 Without Tamiflu tamiflu roche dick cheney? flu prevention signs Avian Flu Treatment who invented tamiflu rogaine flu symptoms Philadelphia Flu Shoots pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu flu shot and tylenol, Star Anise In Tamiflu stock ticker who makes tamiflu does tamiflu work North Carolina Swine Flu influenza a tamiflu aids tamiflu flu; Flu Symptoms 2009 flu multnomah county oregon rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick Bird Flu Pandemic pediatric tamiflu buy tamiflu; Swine Flu Course Progression Duration Treatment Tamiflu swine flu wisconsin? "generic for tamiflu" Order Tamiflu swine flu masks? tamiflu suspension Tamiflu Dose For Influenza tamiflu on line tamiflu stomach flu Swine Flu Test Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. flu treatments without tylenol! Swine Flu In Cancun "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" home treatment of the flu Health Care Flu Shoot tamiflu alcohol relenza vs tamiflunumber needed to treat for tamiflu
Flu "medwatch form for tamiflu" "when to take tamiflu" Tamiflu Bestellen tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Counterfeit Tamiflu Avian Bird Flu tamiflu tamiflu mexico; Tylenol Severe Fluswine flu wisconsin?
flu vaccine! Tamiflu Orders No Prescription swine flu masks? tamiflu uk shop? Tamiflu Order Without A Prescription tamiflu on line tamiflu stomach flu Que Es El Tamiflu Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. flu tracker How Fast Does Tamiflu Work "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" home treatment of the flu Flu Shot While Taking Prednisone tamiflu alcohol relenza vs tamiflu Oculo Tamiflu 60 Mg tamiflu hemorrhoid tamiflu flu Flu Shot Side Effects tamiflu dosing instructions star anise in tamiflu Tamiflu Black Box acheter tamiflu what are some treatments of swine flu Remedy For Stomach Flu flu symptoms prilosec flu shoots companys Flu Vaccine And Coumadin Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. buy tamiflu without a prescription Bactrim And Tamiflu Together tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; tamiflu suspension no prescription Buy Tamiflu Without A Prescription tamiflu without a prescribtionnumber needed to treat for tamiflu
Tamiflu Adverse Events "medwatch form for tamiflu" "when to take tamiflu" Tamiflu By Vbulletin tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Drug Treatment For Swine Flu tamiflu tamiflu manufacturer gilliad Buy No Online Prescription Tamiflu swine flu mask; panleukopenia and tamiflu Motrin Cold And Flu rebate on tamiflu, depo provera flu interfere!swine flu wisconsin?
flu vaccine! Swine Flu Vaccination swine flu masks? tamiflu uk shop? Mercury In Flu Shots tamiflu on line tamiflu stomach flu History Of Flu Vaccination Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. flu treatments without tylenol! Swine Flu Virus "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" home treatment of the flu Cdc Indications For Tamiflu tamiflu alcohol relenza vs tamiflu Tamiflu Melbourne"post-exposure tamiflu dosing"
h1n1 flu symptoms Swine Flu In California tamiflu alcohol rebate on tamiflu, Tamiflu Over The Counter"medwatch form for tamiflu"
"when to take tamiflu" Tamiflu Medical tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Tamiflu Price tamiflu tamiflu manufacturer gilliad Swine Flu Funny swine flu mask; panleukopenia and tamiflu Flu Shoots Essex County Ny rebate on tamiflu, depo flu provera symptom Cipro Tamiflu Drug Interaction tamiflu and seizure swine flu conspiracy Tamiflu Dosing aids tamiflu flu; tamiflu nausea Stomach Flu
This is a place where open-minded critical thinkers of all political persuasions encounter information and arguments that both support and challenge their preconceptions. The goal is not to eliminate differences but to narrow and clarify them. We begin with a bedrock agreement that the search for insight and clarity is important, serious - and fun.
We ask commenters to be civil and substantive and, if possible, good humored. We reserve the right to delete comments that disregard this request.
Do you use Twitter? Follow The Big Question.
Learn more about RSS