This is worth keeping an eye on as it was pretty much the only poll that had Romney in the lead pre Ryan, and now has Obama in the lead post Ryan. It’s the shift I find interesting.
Daily Presidential Tracking Poll
Copyright 2024 © Valance Co., Inc. All rights Reserved.
The Sunni awakening only happened after the folks spent some time with Alqeada. On that note, let me say I’m strongly considering voting for Romney in the hope they implement policy that matches their rehtoric and fail miserably. However, I do think Mitt is a pragmatist at heart, and he will find a way to weasly around his rehtoric and deliver growth and blame the deficit on the Obama legacy.
In 4 years, Hillary will have an easier time governing because she will be partially immune to the right wing painting her as extreme left.
Just curious if I’m the only nut thinking this way?
@Steve, Steve, military grade hardware has been sent to many police departments around the country, new executive powers have been or will be exercised that are certain to be disastrous for the people, warren can’t even go fishing on his boat without a drone flying down over him and monitoring every second of his life, this amount of control and privacy invasion is so unprecedented, mankind is not able to deal with it. The obama administration talks about “transparency” but wants to kill assange after he shines a light on all the darkness. We are FREAKING DOOMED dude, doesn’t matter what president comes in. As warren just posted on prof bill mitchell, youth all over the world are being sacrificed to the dark forces of idleness and will all certainly be the seeds for nazi type socialism that is coming about in the not too distant future. Even his rallying call behind Mike Norman can’t break the cynicism that is so ingraned even in his MMT flock of sheep they ridicule him as a silly misdirected salesman. (PS delong has said scott sumner is doing more harm than good lately alienating so many possible converts? There are many who will never accept Mike Norman as a champion for MMT after the hit jobs he used to do on peter schiff and others back in the day)
Congress has failed us all. Steve if I wasn’t so jolly, I would be running down the streets screaming in a panic at how FREAKING DOOMED we all are! 😉
http://www.nextnewdeal.net/return-hear-nothing-see-nothing-do-nothing-congress
For twelve years this Nation was afflicted with hear-nothing, see-nothing, do-nothing Government. The Nation looked to Government but the Government looked away… Powerful influences strive today to restore that kind of government with its doctrine that that Government is best which is most indifferent. – Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1936
A number of recent articles have pointed out that by most measures, the 112th Congress is not merely the most unpopular Congress in history; it is also the least productive. As both the New York Times and the Washington Post have pointed out of late, this Congress would much rather engage in political posturing and ideological brinkmanship than in passing laws that address the current economic crisis.
http://www.cfeps.org/pubs/wp-pdf/WP1-Vickrey.pdf Obama should read this, sounds like you plaigarized Vickery on your 7dif book from this unpublished paper? 15 fatal fallacies He had twice as many as you? 😉
@Save America,
Do you know what the word ‘plagiarized’ means? it means to take someone else’s work AND WORDS and try to pass it off as own’s own.
There is no plagiarism. If you are equating the word Fallacies in Vickery’s title with Frauds in Mosler’s, don’t. It’s idiotic.
Mosler is clear in his book that he is playing off Keynes’s polite and courtly “innocent frauds” but calling them deadly nonetheless.
As for the content (meaning not the expression thereof), water is wet, rocks are hard, and the sky can be blue. Those are called facts, and 10 people saying them does not make it plagiarism.
This flippant accusation isn’t minor. You should apologize.
sorry for typos. my autocorrect will change words I know I typed correctly.
@MRW, MRW, I put a little smiley face at the end to note my silly sarcasm. Dude chill out, don’t take life too seriously, you are never gonna make it out ALIVE! 😉 So to advance the debate and not just uselessly attack, what do you think of vickrey paper versus moslers book? You do know cfeps is moslers baby right?
I cannot believe the amount of ANGER, attack, and evilness on an internet blog, all you people have become the darkness you fight, all so serious! Mosler you should take more of your flock fishing on your super yacht and fill thier gut with cruzan rum, they are WAY too serious 🙂
@MRW, Galbraith, not Keynes
http://www.mosler.org/wwwboard/messages/47.html Mosler Econ Flock, here was Warren Mosler 10 year political Predictions 10 years ago, I used to visit that old board quite frequently. Mosler, will you give us an updated 10 year political prediction? 😉
Ed Rombach, I can’t tell you how DEEPLY it wounds me that you were large participant going way back from that old board, yet still so shrewdly hold onto your goldug/austrian roots, 10 years of Warren Mosler beating up on you with soft currency economics and it seems he made little headway. Shakes me to the core that we are making any progress. What do you have to say for yourself Rombach? 😉
Posted ByWarren Mosler on January 15, 2003 at 13:04:00:
> >
> > Here’s what’s being set up.
> >
> > 1. Bush tax stuff is way too small to turn the
> > economy.
> >
> > 2. Over the next 24 months the economy weakens as
> the
> > deficit grinds its way to the usual 5% of gdp or
> more
> > – $500 billion + – mainly through falling revenue
> as
> > unemployment rises, corporate earnings wither,
> etc.
> >
> > 3. Hillary Clinton wins the Presidency by a
> landslide
> > promising to increase taxes on the rich to assist
> the
> > poor and balance the budget.
> >
> > 4. After the innaguration the program gets passed
> > while the federal deficit remains around $600
> billion.
> >
> > 5. The economy recovers as it always does after a
> > couple of years of 5%+ deficits restore non govt
> net
> > financial assets/savings/aggregate demand.
> >
> > 6. Once again the Clintons ‘prove’ balancing the budget is good for the economy and win two terms.
> >
> > 7. Half way into her 2nd term the strong economy
> > drives the budget into surplus further proving
> > Clintonomics.
> >
> > 8. The next president is Hillary’s VP who gets
> the
> > votes counted in his favor this time.
> >
> > 9. This next president gets clobbered with
> another
> > economic downturn caused by the previous surplus,
> > and the federal budget goes into deficit.
> > This time they aren’t ‘fooled’ by Bush style tax
> cuts
> > anymore, and try instead to again raise taxes on
> the
> > rich to assist the poor and balance the budget, but they do it too soon,
> > before the deficit is large enough to turn the
> > economy, and it gets much worse.
Posted ByWarren Mosler on January 15, 2003 at 13:04:00:
GOOD STUFF!
> >
> > Here’s what’s being set up.
> >
> > 1. Bush tax stuff is way too small to turn the
> > economy.
> >
> > 2. Over the next 24 months the economy weakens as
> the
> > deficit grinds its way to the usual 5% of gdp or
> more
> > – $500 billion + – mainly through falling revenue
> as
> > unemployment rises, corporate earnings wither,
> etc.
A MONTH OR SO AFTER THIS WAS WRITTEN I MET WITH ANDY CARD, BUSH CHIEF OF STAFF,
AND TOLD HIM MUCH THE SAME. HE GOT IT AND THEY TOOK IMMEDIATE ACTION TO INCREASE SPENDING
AND CUT TAXES. IT WAS SHORTLY AFTER THAT MEETING THAT BUSH WAS ASKED ABOUT THE DEFICIT AND
SAID HE DOESN’T LOOK AT NUMBERS ON PIECES OF PAPER, HE LOOKS AT JOBS, AND DID ALL HE COULD TO MAKE
THE DEFICIT AS LARGE AS POSSIBLE. IT GOT UP TO 200 BILLION FOR Q3 OR ABOUT 800 BILLION ANNUALLY
ENOUGH TO TURN THE ECONOMY ENOUGH TO NOT LOSE THE ELECTION.
> >
> > 3. Hillary Clinton wins the Presidency by a
> landslide
> > promising to increase taxes on the rich to assist
> the
> > poor and balance the budget.
I FORGET WHY SHE DIDN’T RUN AND/OR LOST TO KERRY?
> >
> > 4. After the innaguration the program gets passed
> > while the federal deficit remains around $600
> billion.
> >
> > 5. The economy recovers as it always does after a
> > couple of years of 5%+ deficits restore non govt
> net
> > financial assets/savings/aggregate demand.
THIS IS PRETTY MUCH WHAT HAPPENED UNDER BUSH.
> >
> > 6. Once again the Clintons ‘prove’ balancing the budget is good for the economy and win two terms.
> >
> > 7. Half way into her 2nd term the strong economy
> > drives the budget into surplus further proving
> > Clintonomics.
THIS HAPPENED UNDER BUSH AS THE STRONG ECONOMY DRIVING BY PRIVATE CREDIT EXPANSION TOOK THE DEFICIT DOWN TO 1% OF GDP BY MID 2006.
UNFORTUNATELY THE EXPANSION INCLUDED THE SUB PRIME FRAUD WHICH WAS SERIOUSLY UNSUSTAINABLE.
> >
> > 8. The next president is Hillary’s VP who gets
> the
> > votes counted in his favor this time.
> >
> > 9. This next president gets clobbered with
> another
> > economic downturn caused by the previous surplus,
> > and the federal budget goes into deficit.
IT HAPPENED DURING THE LAST FEW MONTHS OF THE BUSH ADMIN.
AND OBAMA DID GET CLOBBERED BY IT.
> > This time they aren’t ‘fooled’ by Bush style tax
> cuts
> > anymore, and try instead to again raise taxes on
> the
> > rich to assist the poor and balance the budget, but they do it too soon,
> > before the deficit is large enough to turn the
> > economy, and it gets much worse.
MY TIMING WAS FAR FROM PERFECT, BUT NOT TERRIBLE FOR A 10 YEAR FORECAST?
ANY OTHER 10 YEAR FORECASTS FROM BACK THEN ON RECORD?
http://www.mosler.org/wwwboard/messages/924.shtml (while we are taking a walk down memory lane, lets see what Delong and Mosler said about a decade ago)
Professor Delong (in 2004): A bigger deficit means less investment in America.
Mosler: Wrong, as above.
(delong sure has come a LONG way in the past decade!)
And greenspan:
http://www.mosler.org/wwwboard/messages/1018.shtml
(from our very own bubblerefuge Cutcheon!)
Posted by Warren Mosler (65.113.90.18) on 10:06:37 02/28/04
In Reply to: Greenspan comments on SS Fund. posted by John McCutcheon
: Why is Greenspan saying that budget deficits and demographics are the albatrosses to the solvency
: of the social security trust fund? Doesn’t he know the treasury can make those payments under any conditions?
It seems he is concerned about ‘solvency’ at some undefined level. Otherwise he’d be more specific as to potential inflation pressures future spending might provoke at future dates, as that’s the only possible ‘financial problem.’
Warren, the names change, but the game is still the same, ryan, romney, obama, biden, reagan, bush, greenspan, bernanke, ugg!
@Save America,
Save America why dont you dig up Warren’s performance on his own capital or funds he managed during the last decade ?…
Verbal/written predictions by anyone make for good conversation but not much else …
@Walid M, Warren influencing national and international policy is much bigger effect than his personal investing performance.
Delong has been tremendously changed I feel from who he was 10 years ago, finally paying attention to mosler memes.
Today’s government should listen to warren to make better policy for our people. Even though warren was wrong about hillary, he was right about deficit and taxes (and that is what is really important, the policy implemented, not who wins or what party is in power), and still 10 years later, it seems our government keeps forgetting and having to relearn over and over again.
Interesting about Andy Card, is so frustrating that you can reach one administration, and that knowledge is all lost to the next. Bush survived because he listened to warren mosler on deficits and taxes, you learn something new everyday! Obama should have listened too.
@Save America, Obama is/has been instead listening to Pete Peterson and his people (big mistake) … rsp
@Save America, Dont get me wrong : Waren’s comments on policy and the economy are second to none and must be followed and his market calls have been very good since i have followed him . MMT rules . But his batting average in $$ is better evidence of his financial prowess than his record of predictions ..
@Save America, Greenspan was looking to use money to manage and control the economy. He seems to have thought that increasing and decreasing interest rates would slow it down and speed it up.
It’s actually a very deceptive ambition for a self-proclaimed adherent of the free market. If the economy is self-regulating, then it can’t be managed.
What it seems to me has now been definitively proved is that it is possible to derail or crash exchange and trade, but it isn’t possible to simply reverse and start it back up.
And then there’s the problem of enterprise planning to fail in the interest of profit. If he has any expertise, Romney’s lies in destruction.
@Monica Smith,
Warren G said you can’t be any geek off the street, if you want to regulate:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1plPyJdXKIY Should have been greenspans theme song! LOL!
Greenspan was problem, from ancient times, tax driven money with government spending as price setter seems to be lost to all modern education. Even on that old board, mosler was talking about cowrie shells: http://www.mosler.org/wwwboard/messages/219.html and his cfeps friends and others http://moslereconomics.com/mandatory-readings/what-is-money/
http://www.cfeps.org/pubs/wp-pdf/WP35-Forstater.pdf
The notion of tax-driven money can be found throughout the history of economic thought, in the works of a remarkable range of authors representing various time periods
and schools of thought. The idea also appears in policy discussions and in fields outside economics, such as political science and history. Neither is the idea unique to the West,
as Von Glahn’s work demonstrates. It also appears that monies previously thought to be “primitive,” such as the cowrie, were actually tax-driven. Nevertheless, the idea is conspicuously absent from textbooks and works on monetary theory and history.
One possible explanation for the silence concerning the notion may have something to do with the implications of the TDM idea for the relation of the economy
and the state. Orthodox and even many heterodox approaches view the economy as
relatively ‘autonomous’ and theory often assumes a ‘pure’ economy with no government.
The TDM perspective implies that not only is money a creature of the state, but that
much else about the economy is as well.
Monica is no doubt in my mind, powers got rich off of well functioning society, then install greenspan to intentionally destroy to thier own benefit and the cost of the rest of us.
Greenspan was disaster for the greater good and “public purpose”
I am not even going to vote in the next election Monica, it makes no difference who wins, we are freaking DOOMED!
Love your comment on easier to destroy than create! Dr McCoy said that about Khan and the genesis project
@Save America, Thanks for your reply.
I’ve about definitely decided that the conundrum faced by incompetents is how to make people work for them without generating a lot of resistance, since they have nothing to give back. (Incompetents we always have with us, btw). Coercion of the threat of force works, especially if some other non-critical population can be made an example of. Blacks in America served a dual purpose for a long time, being both an exemplar of physical coercion and the performers of productive work.
However, eventually resistance got the upper hand and incompetents were faced with following through on threats, a process which destroys what it wants to move, if abuse has to be amplified unto death. Not to mention that killing the disobedient has a really negative effect on the witnesses. Injury elicits empathy; death elicits disgust.
Anyway, gentle persuasion actually works better and we can see evidence of that in the politician’s success in collecting money in exchange for good stories. But then, money makes it easy. It is worthless, as long as it sits in one’s pocket, but it also acts as an intermediary between the competent and the incompetent. Money makes it possible for people whose only talent is the gift of gab to trade for the food they need for themselves and their families. People have proved willing to pay what they got from being productive to people who tell them what they want to hear.
It seems that the incompetents attracted to the conservative spectrum are, in addition to being without practical talents, inordinately stingy. So much so that they want to deprive others and accumulate what they don’t even need for themselves. Is that greed? Whatever it is, it’s self-destructive. They are killing the goose that laid the golden egg.
Conservatives are constipated. Getting them to spend money on political advertising is a good thing.
@Save America, Good stuff SA, you have certainly evolved from the “HooverPrintingPress” “WesleySnipes” days. Can’t keep up with you. How do you process so much info?
@jcmccutcheon, I posted a long comment but it didn’t take I guess.
Cutcheon you were the one I was trying to catch, you were at least a decade ahead of every other software geek out there!
http://www.mosler.org/wwwboard/messages/1264.shtml Man I was scared sh**less when I read your post that Reagan wanted to take us back on a gold standard. How have we failed to convert Ed Rombach away from his pirate days gold bug memes, he has been around forever too.
http://www.mosler.org/wwwboard/messages/1577.shtml I am so far behind you, I am in another solar system. It seems even before you engaged Mosler, you had strong basis in deficits, tax driven money, gold bug sillyness, what in your software engineering education gave you so much insight? When moslers own cfeps people admit all this knowledge has been left out of modern economics education. I am sitting here fighting with my other personalities in a “scanner darkly” nightmare how far ahead you were when I arrived at moslers old board. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXpGaOqb2Z8
http://www.mosler.org/wwwboard/messages/2089.shtml
http://www.mosler.org/wwwboard/messages/1319.shtml
I was johnny 5 at old board(he lost lots of messages where I went under other names too), he was the robot from “short circuit”
Cutcheon, we need software developers to help build out stuff for oculushub.com. Help bring VR/AR stuff with wide FOV, proper parallax programming, cubemapped fisheye etc etc. Come help us and give up on all this financial abstractions, it has already consumed too many souls!
Rasmussen is a shill. They are part of the preparing the ground operation. Their objective is to keep the base energized and engaged and to keep the opposition electorate either so depressed they won’t vote, or so over confident, they’ll stay home.
Low voter turnout used to be decried as long as conservatives voted and liberals were deterred. 2006 was a water-shed. We haven’t heard low voter turnout bemoaned and, in fact, there’s an active effort to ‘thin’ the herd by purging the rolls and making it harder to register and more inconvenient to vote. That the electorate is enemy number one is becoming clear. If universal suffrage can’t be repealed, it has to be pushed back.
Whose agenda is that? The only group that loses status when legislators are demoted to stewards and public servants. The Tea Party retired 19 “established incumbents” in 2010. Last week they removed an eleven term incumbent in Minnesota and a long-timer in Florida. By targeting earmarks, the Tea Partiers removed one of Congress’ favorite extortion tools.
While the Koch Brothers are unprincipled, I have some sympathy for them being tired of getting jerked around. Congress threatening environmental protection and then never following through does not make it easy to innovate.
@Monica Smith,
The Koch brothers are quite the lightening rods. Ever compare the amount they’ve spent in comparison to Soros, Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, and Pew Charitable Trusts, etc? I’d bet you’d be surprised.
@Vincent,
Yep, if you stick to just reading the nytimes you’d think there were no rich Democrats.
Corzine coined more than Romney, and rich Democrats spend an awful lot on advancing their political goals.
The difference is that most conservatives believe gov shouldn’t be as powerful as it is and that gov is less productive (for mankind as well as for the individual) than the private sector. Thus, they find it difficult to fund political goals in favor of private enterprise. It’s only when gov starts to lower real productivity that conservatives finally decide they should fund political goals as a defense against the progressives.
It’s not surprising that the progressives are always willing to spend a lot, they believe that riches come from the gov — which is also why corruption among democrats isn’t surprising, they feel that extracting favors from their political powers is all part of the game (cf Valerie Jarret’s real estate prowess).
It’s all about real productivity. Hiring people for the USDA to write articles about why we eat too much isn’t really productive. Building a ship that can take me into space for a day for $20k is really productive — because it will drive me to do the bidding of others so that I can afford that luxury.
The funny thing is that many metrics are really messed up — we can boost GDP and get full employment without any problem at all. Just offer everyone a gov job that pays $10B a year — gov employees are assumed to be “worth their pay” and so contribute to GDP. You’ll have full employment, and GDP will go through the roof. The only problem is that everything would quickly all apart. The real answers are all at the margins, and are not so easy to get at.
Wish I had more time to debate, and people to discuss with. Thankfully Vincent throws in some ripostes.
And what in the world is going on with anyone getting angry at Strawberry Picker!?
Hard to draw any conclusion right now. Numbers have been going up and down. We’ll see in a couple of weeks.