GOP spending plan would send economy into tailspin

“As part of our effort to liberate our economy from the shackles of out-of-control spending, the House will soon vote to cut discretionary spending by over $100 billion over the last seven months of this fiscal year.”
– House Speaker John Boehner, Feb. 17.

From the Financial Times:

“The Republican plan to slash government spending by $61bn in 2011 could reduce US economic growth by 1.5 to 2 percentage points in the second and third quarters of the year, a Goldman Sachs economist has warned.

The note from Alec Phillips, a forecaster based in Washington, was seized in the ongoing US budget fight by Democrats as validating their argument that the legislation approved by the Republican-led House of Representatives last Saturday would do significant damage to the US recovery…

The Goldman analysis also points out that a potential compromise deal with $25bn in spending reductions this year – a more likely scenario – would lead to a smaller drag on growth of 1 percentage point in the second quarter.”

In related news, we seem destined for a government shutdown sometime early next month. Government spending authority is about to expire, and the House and Senate are fighting over the terms of a two-week extension that would give them time to reach a deal. (The House has passed a budget resolution for the rest of the year that cuts $61 billion in discretionary spending, a level that has the Senate balking.)

House Republicans have offered what they call a compromise: A two-week spending bill that cuts $4 billion. However, as Politico reports, “Republican aides say the cuts in the two-week spending bill would be proportional — or pro-rated — to reflect the levels in the first measure.” In other words, it’s not a compromise at all, just a two-week repackaging of their original position.

“GOP aides say the goal is to send Reid a bill that he can’t turn down, either because of the threat of a shutdown or because enough of his politically vulnerable Democrats support the Republican-written measure.

According to a Democrat, a Boehner aide told Senate leadership that House Republicans won’t budge on spending cuts worth $61B over seven months, nor will they accept any spending over the pro-rated version they plan to offer next week. The Boehner aide reportedly told Senate leadership that anything short of that would lead to a shutdown, since the tea party Republicans expect top Republicans to stand firm on the cuts.

On Boehner’s speaker blog, the headline reads:

“Senate Democrats “Reject” Short-Term Spending Bill They Haven’t Seen, Threaten Shutdown”

The post goes on to refer to the Democrats’ “job-crushing spending binge,” part of the Republicans’ increasingly explicit effort to rewrite economic history. As they hope to frame things in the public mind, the biggest economic collapse in 80 years was somehow caused by stimulus spending that occurred after the collapse.

As Boehner put it recently, “Excessive government spending is hampering private sector job creation by spreading uncertainty, eroding confidence, and discouraging private investment, and it has to stop.”

There is no feasible economic mechanism by which that could be true. Long-term, if we don’t address our debt problem, it very well could have economic consequences. But there is no logical or rational means by which government spending can be said to be killing job growth in this country.

In fact, as the Goldman Sachs analysis for its private clients point out, reduced government spending while the recovery is still fragile would seriously damage the country.

– Jay Bookman

236 comments Add your comment

jm

February 24th, 2011
10:35 am

No it won’t….

Fred

February 24th, 2011
10:35 am

jm

February 24th, 2011
10:39 am

On the face of it, the analysis is wrong. Even using the Romer / Obama style assumptions, cutting $60B is 0.4% of GDP, and our economy is growing faster than that. Second, everyone’s econometric models obviously stink, including Goldman’s.

Cutting spending will increase confidence in the US economy because it will help business leaders believe that the Federal Government will eventually get their spending under control, and reduce the amount of future tax increases necessary to balance the budget.

Business and individuals are terrified by what may happen if nothing is done to fix spending.

Jimmy62

February 24th, 2011
10:41 am

When you take capital from new ventures, private ventures, etc., and give it to failed businesses, then absolutely you are preventing growth of employment. You are supporting failed business plans at the expense of.. Well all the possibilities in the universe. How many times does Chrysler have to fail before we stop giving them more money, money that should be floating around in capital markets helping good business plans succeed.

jm

February 24th, 2011
10:44 am

If government spending has a 5X multiplier effect, I wonder why the economy didn’t go up by $700B times 5 during the stimulus. GDP should have gone up by $3.5 Trillion. Odd, it did not.

The Goldman report is such baloney. Just trying to curry favor with the powers that be.

Jay, BTW, willing to say the EPI compensation report was biased? Sincere question.

Fred

February 24th, 2011
10:44 am

What you mean jm, is that businesses like goldman Sachs are worried what may happen if they can’t stick their greedy paws in our pockets. Use the power of the Gov’t to steal money from taxpayers and give it to them.

The Republicans started the train wreck, now they want to nuke the debris site……..

JKL2

February 24th, 2011
10:45 am

-a Goldman Sachs economist has warned

Obama’s friends say “Republicans bad, Democrats good”. Would never have seen that one coming. I suppose next your going to tell us obama backing away from the gay marriage ban is popular in San Francisco…

USinUK

February 24th, 2011
10:45 am

“Cutting spending will increase confidence in the US economy because it will help business leaders believe that the Federal Government will eventually get their spending under control”

yeah! it’s worked wonders here in the UK!! boy, howdy, nothing screams strong economy like negative growth! (and, even if you took the snow effect out, we would have had flat growth)

md

February 24th, 2011
10:45 am

Well……..let’s add more to that 14 trillion and see where that takes us……………….

Yeh, that’s a good plan.

buck@gon

February 24th, 2011
10:45 am

The “report” you “report” on Washington-Man-Jay, written by Washington-Man-Alec, is necessarily vague. If I were an analyst reporting from Washington (interesting, it’s not Goldman’s base of ops in NYC), I too would probably buck up the gubment’s position, especially since Goldman benefits so greatly from government spending and protection of Goldman’s markets–not to mention to revolving door between Goldman executives and the White House.

What you mean by reducing growth 1% is anyone’s guess. Could this mean reducing the overall economy size from say 100% to 99%, or does it mean reducing the sliver of the economy that is growth from 100% to 99%? We can’t tell from the information given, and you don’t say. One is a lot more meaningful than the other, and if you focused on being clear and precise in your writing, you might understand that. Because you don’t, it would make sense to assume that it is the latter, and that, as usual, you are trying to make a conservative bashing mountain out of a mole-hole.

This is the vague and knee-jerk reporting we have come to expect from WMJ, CC ajc, inc for years, whereby something (like yesterday’s prank call to Governor Walker) is said to be news in favor of the liberal point of view, but in reality is really just amateur flack, chucked up into the air scraping for such news to turn up in case something perjorative actually exists.

What you end by saying in your piece above is admission that we must do something about the budget, but that we shouldn’t do anything RIGHT NOW.

One can be forgiven then for suspecting that this is not unlike the ramblings of an habitual drunk who realizes that he has a problem, but that the best time to quit drinking is NEXT WEEK.

Lloyd Bridges from Airplane– “Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue.”

jm

February 24th, 2011
10:46 am

“a level that has the Senate balking” I think by “Senate” you mean Harry Reid. There are plenty of dems on board in the Senate, it’s the Senate Leader, a Dem, that is blowing things up.

Democrats will be to blame if the government shuts down. The House has passed a bill.

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

February 24th, 2011
10:47 am

“There is no feasible economic mechanism by which that could be true. Long-term, if we don’t address our debt problem, it very well could have economic consequences. But there is no logical or rational means by which government spending can be said to be killing job growth in this country.”

Do you have an economics degree ?

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

February 24th, 2011
10:49 am

.” Long-term, if we don’t address our debt problem ”

Congress always has the grandiose plan for “down the road” which is another way of saying we don’t have the guts that it takes to do it now.

jm

February 24th, 2011
10:49 am

“could reduce US economic growth by 1.5 to 2 percentage points in the second and third quarters”

1. notice word “could”
2. “reduce the rate of growth” does not mean a double dip, it means GDP may only grow 2% instead of 3.5%

People are bad at reading.

Peadawg

February 24th, 2011
10:50 am

So what do you suggest, Jay? We keep spending like we are now? How’s that working out for us?

BTW Jay, weren’t you just bytching a couple of weeks ago that the proposed $35 billion in cuts wasn’t enough since the GOP promised $100 billion? Now you say $60 billion is too much. Make up your mind dude, seriously.

larry

February 24th, 2011
10:50 am

Yep, the house passed a bill alright that cuts the EPA and the SEC a combined 48 billion dollars over the next seven months.

Thats what we really need !!! None of that stinking oversight !!!
Lets just forget what partially caused the Great Recession.

Jay

February 24th, 2011
10:50 am

It’s not “anyone’s guess,” Buck. It’s standard economic language. I’m simply shocked you are find it so unfamiliar.

It means that an economy that would otherwise grow at 3.5 percent a year would instead grow at 1.5 to 2 percent a year. And that’s a lot of jobs.

jm

February 24th, 2011
10:51 am

Scout 10:49 – amen. Kick the can is the DC permanent game. That’s why even Democrat Erskine Bowles was royally hacked about the POTUS’s budget proposal and his tax compromise.

md

February 24th, 2011
10:52 am

“But there is no logical or rational means by which government spending can be said to be killing job growth in this country.”

Kidding right??

Companies aren’t sitting on trillions of dollars for nothing……….I for one am hording all the cash I can get my hands on………I doubt seriously I am the only one planning for darker times.

jm

February 24th, 2011
10:52 am

Jay, 2% growth (assuming, ridiculously, that the GS guy is correct) is not a “tailspin”.

jm

February 24th, 2011
10:53 am

Deficit spending = tax deferral. AKA: Screw the young people

USinUK

February 24th, 2011
10:53 am

so, with Q410 GDP at 3.2, we’re talking about cutting growth in half or more …

ByteMe

February 24th, 2011
10:54 am

In fact, as the Goldman Sachs analysis for its private clients point out, reduced government spending while the recovery is still fragile would seriously damage the country.

That’s not what it says. Cutting 1.5-2 points off the GDP when nearly every serious economist is expecting GDP to grow 3-4% this year is not a “fragile” recovery nor going to do “serious damage” to anything other than certain constituents’ favorite programs. It will create layoffs, though, which do cost state governments more than the House Republicans are letting on.

We need to cut, but cutting the EPA so that you win political favor with big utilities and coal interests is just stupid.

Jay

February 24th, 2011
10:54 am

jm, I can understand why you would be skeptical of the report. I don’t think you can conclude it was wrong unless you read it and identify WHERE it was wrong.

Did it use bad data? Make leaps of logic?

Its source would be cause for skepticism, but not proof it is wrong.

jm

February 24th, 2011
10:54 am

md 10:52 – second that. On the list of things not to do in favor of stashing $ in Canada: eating out, starting a business, anything discretionary. We still go to the grocery store and buy gas of course. That’s about it. Here’s to hoping for sunnier days after 2012.

getalife

February 24th, 2011
10:54 am

It’s a tough call.

We got our resident economic expert jm saying ” no it won’t” compared to the corporate big shots running our country Goldman.

Yeah, I think I will go with Goldman on this one.

jm

February 24th, 2011
10:56 am

Jay, I’ll try to find it and read it. But I just know logically that government spending does not have a 3x to 5x multiplier effect. Most studies show it is only slightly greater than 1.

md

February 24th, 2011
10:57 am

Back to the “perception is reality” theme……..

Here is the equation for folks having a hard time seeing it…….

Debt of almost 15 trillion……..

More debt being ADDED as we speak………

Poor history of the misfits doing anything about it…………

Long established history of waste in “gov’t”…………..

Folks wanting others to pay to fix the problem………….

Yep, sounds like the recipe for good times to come………..

Gary

February 24th, 2011
10:57 am

The fact is that if this country could show some physcal resposibility and cut the defficit invest in the US would increase. The dollar would become strong, and the economy would grow in the private sector not the public sector. The last time we balanced the budget (With Newt leading the way) my 401k nearly doubled and I was averaging 11% raises each year. With our current spending my 401k has been cut in half, my salary is frozen, and my house is worth half what I paid for it. Maybe tax and spend does not work very well.

Paul

February 24th, 2011
10:58 am

The can’t even compromise on this? It does not bode well for major long-term reductions.

Defense has been off the table (except for some Tea Party Republicans and the Obama Administration) but I sense the business community thinks that may change. Ft Worth paper (site of some major defense contractors) just ran a huge piece about how many small businesses are dependent on defense contracts. Well, y’know what? There’s going to be a cycle of adjustment.

Tagging on to rewriting history: not only are many voters fundamentally ignorant of many issues, they are ignorant of history. I imagine the Democratic PR machine will swing in, but it may not be enough to offset the preset perception many will have if the cuts pass and GDP declines: “Ever since Obama got elected, the economy’s stayed bad or gotten worse.”

But a shutdown?

A real, no kidding, not just in appearance shutdown?

These guys are nuts.

Paul

February 24th, 2011
10:59 am

Scout

“Do you have an economics degree ?”

Do you have a divinity degree?

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

February 24th, 2011
11:00 am

JAY

“The funny thing is, Scout now has his example of what the Tenth Amendment outlaws….”

SOME THOUGHTS:

1) This issue is so important I have always supported a Constitutional Amendment route.
2) In this case the judge and the 10th Amendment are right …….. leave it to the states.
3) However, one federal judge does not a Constitutional issue make or Obamacare is also out the window.
4) In my opinion, the Supreme Court (after the appellate decision) will have to re-establish federal jurisdiction on this or their past (and future) abuse and ignoring of the 10th Amendment will be in doubt.
5) As a case in point, a knucklehead federal judge just ruled that “mental activity” (aka “thought”) is covered by the “Commerce Clause”.
6) I’m still waiting for your “mental activity” on that ruling as per my earlier post below …………………
0311/0317 – 1811/1801
February 23rd, 2011
11:00 am

JAY !!!

Regarding our continuing debate on the meaning of the 10th Amendment, a Clinton appointee federal district court judge in Washington (a slave owner by the way) D.C. has ruled that Congress Can Regulate “MENTAL ACTIVITY (emphasis added)” Under Commerce Clause.

Now I submit to you the following:

1) She should never have been appointed.
2) That reasoning under a plain reading of the 10th Amendment is idiotic.
3) That reasoning if upheld would make the 10th Amendment null and void.
4) Making an Amendment null and void without further amending it or abolishing it is Constitutional treason.

Your thoughts ……………………..

md

February 24th, 2011
11:00 am

“We got our resident economic expert jm saying ” no it won’t” compared to the corporate big shots running our country Goldman.”

Yep, let’s listen to the company that just fleeced the taxpayers for billions………….just what they want to happen……….

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

February 24th, 2011
11:01 am

Paul:

Do you have a degree ?

Doggone/GA

February 24th, 2011
11:02 am

“Maybe tax and spend does not work very well.”

The problem isn’t tax and spend, it’s BORROW and spend.

Paul

February 24th, 2011
11:03 am

Scout

A couple of ‘em.

But the point was, Jay read a report, drew some conclusions. Your response was to not address the conclusions but to ask if he had an academic degree in the area under consideration.

As you’re oftentimes making religious arguments, listing Biblical cites to support your position, I thought it consistent to ask the same of you.

ByteMe

February 24th, 2011
11:03 am

But I just know logically that government spending does not have a 3x to 5x multiplier effect. Most studies show it is only slightly greater than 1.

It depends on the type of government spending.

http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/aug/12/rachel-maddow/maddow-claims-spending-more-stimulative-tax-cuts/

To start out, we turned to testimony by Mark Zandi before the Senate Finance Committee on April 14, 2010. Zandi is the chief economist for Moody’s Economy.com and a former adviser to Republican Sen. John McCain during his 2008 presidential campaign. Page 5 of the testimony contains a table that summarizes Zandi’s calculated “bang for the buck” for various fiscal stimulus programs. Spending $1 on unemployment insurance benefits, for example, increases the GDP — the value of goods and services that the economy produces — by $1.61 a year later, according to Zandi. (We found some counter-arguments in a previous Truth-O-Meter item checking New Hampshire Sen. Jeanne Shaheen’s use of Zandi’s data.) A temporary increase in food stamps has the biggest stimulative effect. For each dollar spent, GDP grows by $1.74 one year later. For spending increases as a whole, the “bang for the buck” ranges from $1.13 for the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program to $1.74 for food stamps.

The former economist for the GOP presidential candidate also looked at the stimulative effect of tax cuts. Making the Bush income tax cuts permanent has a multiplier of 0.32, which means that for every dollar the government cuts in taxes, GDP grows by $0.32. Cutting the corporate tax rate also has a multiplier of $0.32. According to the chart, the most stimulative tax cut initiative would be a job tax credit, which has a multiplier of $1.30.

Christina Romer, who heads President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers until she steps down Sept. 3, 2010, also addressed the question of fiscal multipliers in a speech at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business on Feb. 27, 2009. She began by acknowledging that “estimating these multipliers is difficult and that there is surely substantial uncertainty around any estimate.” She then went on to argue, however, that based on her analysis with Jared Bernstein (an economic advisor to Vice President Joe Biden) of the stimulus package that President Obama signed in February 2009, “a tax cut has a multiplier of roughly 1.0 after about a year and a half, and spending has a multiplier of about 1.6.” In other words, government spending is more effective than cutting taxes.

Midori

February 24th, 2011
11:04 am

Question: jm — do you have a job? or are you paid to post your endless “it’s all the democrats fault” b.s. hour after hour?

AmVet

February 24th, 2011
11:06 am

Boner is a Grade A clown.

The three vast and largest parts of the deficit spending problem remain untouched and inviolable to these corporate water carriers.

And he and his spendthrift buddies want to try and make idiotic, symbolic gestures by tweaking the tiniest part of the problem possible.

Disgraceful…

The Price is Right

February 24th, 2011
11:06 am

Most studies show it is only slightly greater than 1.

How about backing up your claim with something other than more of your lip service for a change, jm.

Adam

February 24th, 2011
11:08 am

Liberals: not surprised. Conservatives: NO IT WON’T AGHAGHAGH

Let’s examine this this way: Spending on the stimulus did not cause 100% dramatic reversal of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. It did, however, mitigate the problems. The GOP plan is to do the opposite of spending, by cutting both taxes AND spending at the same time.

Arguably, taxes actually have nothing to do with it. Raising them or lowering them won’t do anything to the private sector in any significant way. Keeping them in place for two more years did NOT create a myriad of jobs and solve the economic crisis by itself, much like the stimulus did not solve everything all by itself either.

But the GOP plan is to cut anything and everything that keeps the poor and elderly from living on the streets and starving. To the GOP, the budget only exists insofar as the numbers on the federal budget. Things like taking care of our elderly don’t matter as much, now, apparently.

I would say maybe it’ll get better once the fervor dies down, but the fervor hasn’t seen any evidence of dying down since Clinton took office. The GOP’s long game is apparent to all, and people want to deny it for some reason.

George P. Burdell

February 24th, 2011
11:08 am

jm,

I had the same reaction to the economic reduction you did and it doesn’t pass the quick back-of-the-envelope sanity check. Isn’t it funny when we talk about tax increases or decreases, most liberals prefer to use static calculations on revenue impacts, but if you talk about cutting spending, they suddenly realize the multiplier effect and usually way overinflate it?

ByteMe

February 24th, 2011
11:08 am

The Price is Right: I already did his homework for him.

AmVet

February 24th, 2011
11:08 am

Do you have a divinity degree?

Great return burn, Paul…

Adam

February 24th, 2011
11:10 am

George: but if you talk about cutting spending, they suddenly realize the multiplier effect and usually way overinflate it?

Huh? What does that mean? My caffeine isn’t kicking in as much as it should this morning….

carlosgvv

February 24th, 2011
11:11 am

Democrats say the GOP plan will send our economy into a tailspin. Boehner says we must liberate our economy from the shackels of out-of-control spending. Economists say middle-east unrest will kick up gas prices to over $4.00 per gallon and this will de-rail any recession recovery. Looks like we can’t win for losing.

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

February 24th, 2011
11:12 am

Paul:

Well, I have a degree in accounting but I value wisdom over knowledge.

stands for decibels

February 24th, 2011
11:12 am

GOP spending plan would send economy into tailspin

They have to destroy the country in order to save it.

Adam

February 24th, 2011
11:13 am

carlosgv: Actually I agree with you. We are in serious trouble no matter what we do, unless the entire country somehow gets universally optimistic and it stays that way. Only morale can help at this point.

USinUK

February 24th, 2011
11:13 am

Paul – 10:59 – baHA! that made my day!

Jay

February 24th, 2011
11:14 am

Tax cuts = tax deferral. AKA: Screw the young people

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

February 24th, 2011
11:14 am

Paul:

By the way, this is an opinion thread and no one (not even Jay) has the market on statistics which as you know can be maneuvered to say just about anything you want them to say.

ByteMe

February 24th, 2011
11:16 am

this is an opinion thread and no one (not even Jay) has the market on statistics which as you know can be maneuvered to say just about anything you want them to say.

Way to blanket deny any facts that don’t suit your pre-determined outcome instead of working to refute them with your own facts.

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

February 24th, 2011
11:16 am

USinUK :

It was funny wasn’t it !

By the way, I don’t think you addressed my post about federal law enforcement having the RIGHT as human beings to collective bargaining and strikes if necessary ?

md

February 24th, 2011
11:16 am

“They have to destroy the country in order to save it.”

In a two party system, that is the perpetual cycle………….and we fools fall for it every time.

The only job on the planet where one can screw everything up and then turn around and campaign to fix it.

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

February 24th, 2011
11:16 am

ByteMe :

Which can also be skewed.

Bosch

February 24th, 2011
11:17 am

“Scout

“Do you have an economics degree ?”

Do you have a divinity degree?”

Dammit, Paul — that coke blowing out my nose hurt.

Paul

February 24th, 2011
11:17 am

Scout

That’s the point, isn’t it?

I’ve a friend who’s a minister. Was. He’s in an assisted care facility now. But, he held doctorates in two widely different fields. Might’ve had a divinity degree, I don’t know.

One of his favorite sayings while in academia (before he second career) was “the intellect is sterile.”

In his talks, he regularly cited multi-year periods in which many, many Nobel winners did not have degrees in areas in which they won the prize.

So while a degree can be indicative of some things, I think we both agree it is not the be-all and end-all of the value of an idea?

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

February 24th, 2011
11:18 am

“Tax cuts = tax deferral. AKA: Screw the young people”

Spending cuts = deficit reduction. AKA: Help the young people!

md

February 24th, 2011
11:19 am

“Tax cuts = tax deferral. AKA: Screw the young people”

Young people?

Shoot, we are already working on the yet to be born people…………..

By the time WE get our act together, we’ll be 3-4 generations down the road……….

USinUK

February 24th, 2011
11:19 am

Scout – I think all non-emergency / non-critical workers should have the right to collective bargaining / strikes.

of course, I’m of an age that I remember the NYPD “blue flu” in the 1970s, too – a strike by any other name …

AmVet

February 24th, 2011
11:19 am

Scout, you know-it-all college boys make me sick! (grin)

USinUK

February 24th, 2011
11:20 am

“Spending cuts = deficit reduction. AKA: Help the young people!”

of course, it’s mostly their programs that are being cut, but what they hey, they’ll never notice …

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Tom, Jay Bookman AJC. Jay Bookman AJC said: GOP spending cuts would send economy into a tailspin; http://bit.ly/ebraQs [...]

Mick

February 24th, 2011
11:21 am

It seems that the repubs ran on a platform of “where are the jobs”? How’s does subtracting jobs through massive budget cuts grow the economy? Why would dell or any other conglomerate care if the deficit is 13 trillion as opposed to 14 trillion? Someone please explain?

Doggone/GA

February 24th, 2011
11:21 am

“So while a degree can be indicative of some things, I think we both agree it is not the be-all and end-all of the value of an idea?”

One of THE most inane things I have EVER heard about getting a degree – and I heard it on an ad just the other day – is that it “proves you can make a decision and stick to it” Like having a job, doing it well, and working well AT it for years proves NOTHING.

I lost a promotion to exactly that inane thought because I didn’t have a degree. So they hired someone off the street who had a degree in MUSIC – to supervise COMPUTER center employees. Yeah, now THERE’s a relevent degree!

Peadawg

February 24th, 2011
11:21 am

“They have to destroy the country in order to save it.” – Obama’s doing that right punkin but I don’t see bytching about that?

Adam

February 24th, 2011
11:22 am

Spending cuts = deficit reduction

Not really. I haven’t seen a single plan that shows enough spending cuts to reduce our level of spending below our revenue line.

Peadawg

February 24th, 2011
11:23 am

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

February 24th, 2011
11:23 am

Bosch :

It was funny wasn’t it.

However, asking me if I have a degree in any subject I am posting abput (or you or anyone else) is just a backdoro way of saying “I don’t think you know what you’re talking about” !

It’s used quite often.

Paul @ 11:17

Yes, that was my point also ………….. intelligence and wisdom are not twins.

Paul

February 24th, 2011
11:23 am

Hey Bosch!

Glad you’re here. Had a question for you the other day, but you’d left.

(for the rest of you, this is off-topic so you can skip it).

Remember how you were talking with SoCom and you said you had this song going thru your head and you couldn’t get it out? The one that, I think went “it’s a small world af-ter all…. it’s a small world, af-ter all, it’s a small world af-ter all, it’s a small, small world.” That one? What I wanted to know is, how long did that keep playing? Did it ever start up again? Was there a time when it came back into your head and you just couldn’t get rid of it? Any idea what triggered it?

I told my wife I was going to ask you that. She said “I wouldn’t be surprised if someday, someone put out a contract on you.”

If they did, I don’t know if I could hide. After all, it’s a small, small world!

AmVet

February 24th, 2011
11:25 am

Recently I read this and laughed.

We have two parties in this country – the wimpy D party and the evil R party.

We are well and royally screwed…

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

February 24th, 2011
11:25 am

Doggone/GA:

I would agree with you on that. I think our whole college system is a big waste of time ………… and needs serious revamping.

I’ll take good performing work experience any day.

Liberals complain about spending cuts...

February 24th, 2011
11:25 am

…nothing new here folks. Move along. Move along.

Mick

February 24th, 2011
11:27 am

Wow – got my tax refund, direct deposit after efile on 2/15, just in time before the gov’t shutdown…

George W

February 24th, 2011
11:28 am

Jay….you are worried about the GOP spending plan when this president has already spent over $1.5 Trillion? haha man you really need to redirect your aim.

AmVet

February 24th, 2011
11:28 am

I think our whole college system is a big waste of time ………… and needs serious revamping.

A whole bunch of the people there would seem to fit that description, but as for the institutions themselves, do tell? Please expound…

Keep up the good fight!

February 24th, 2011
11:28 am

Well if someone is suggesting that they think that Scout Zero does not know what he is talking about…would seem that is a very accurate assessment of what they are thinking. And perhaps a very accurate assessment of what Scout Zero is talking about……

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

February 24th, 2011
11:28 am

USinUK:

“Scout – I think all non-emergency / non-critical workers should have the right to collective bargaining / strikes. ”

Why is that? Have you ever heard of “equal protection under the law”. Why gives them that right and not law enforcement …………. going on strike would merely enhance their “COLLECTIVE BARGAINING POWER” and isn’t that what this is all about?

They (law enforcement) would have the BEST unions !!

What say ye?

Mick

February 24th, 2011
11:29 am

**I think our whole college system is a big waste of time**

Scout, do you hold either an undergrad or graduate degree? If not, then your criticism has no pretense of validity..

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

February 24th, 2011
11:29 am

Pillow fight:

Good morning.

AmVet

February 24th, 2011
11:31 am

Mick, he already answered that question earlier.

He’s one of those elitist, liberally educated college boys with an accounting degree!

USinUK

February 24th, 2011
11:32 am

03 – because, if trash collectors decided to strike, it would be bad, but not lethal. same can’t be said about police. or fire. or medical staff.

Bosch

February 24th, 2011
11:33 am

Paul,

Tell Mrs. Paul to up your life insurance…… :evil:

Bosch

February 24th, 2011
11:35 am

” because, if trash collectors decided to strike, it would be bad, but not lethal.”

Not necessarily USinUK — if people could not take their own garbage to a landfill or have it hauled off somehow, then the garbage could attract wild raccoon with rabies and that could be lethal my friend.

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

February 24th, 2011
11:35 am

AmVet:

1) The great, great majority of our universities are liberal seminaries. That makes them bad from the start.

2) That said, college should be so difficult that if you party-party …………. you flunk out.

3) Every degree should be co-op based. Students graduate with no work experience in their degree.

4) Garbage courses need to go out the door (i.e., “underwater Korean basket weaving” types)

5) ROTC and recruiting should be allowed on every campus or you lose ALL federal funds, research money, grants, etc.

I could go on and on but time prohibits me.

md

February 24th, 2011
11:36 am

“I haven’t seen a single plan that shows enough spending cuts to reduce our level of spending below our revenue line.”

And you probably never will………..

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

February 24th, 2011
11:36 am

Bosch:

Doesn’t matter how critical ……….. that just give more bargaining power !

Isn’t that what this is all about ?

USinUK

February 24th, 2011
11:36 am

Bosch and Paul – you guys haven’t learned the secret weapon against earworms:

The Carpenters!

hum any Carpenters tune and that earworm, no matter how annoying, is replaced!

why do birds … suddenly appear … everytime … you are near?
just like me
they long to be
close to youuuuuuuuuuuuuu

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

February 24th, 2011
11:37 am

USinUK:

“03 – because, if trash collectors decided to strike, it would be bad, but not lethal. same can’t be said about police. or fire. or medical staff.”

So what? That just gives them more bargaining power ! Just the threat of a strike would mean HIGHER PAY AND BENEFITS !

Isn’t that what this is all about or are you hedging on me?

md

February 24th, 2011
11:38 am

“I think all non-emergency / non-critical workers should have the right to collective bargaining / strikes. ”

Wonder if not teaching the future generations would qualify as “critical”……..1/3 of folks already don’t value an education, wonder what increasing that number would do to the overall picture.

USinUK

February 24th, 2011
11:38 am

Bosch – 11:35 – NYC and London have both experienced trash collector strikes – to my knowledge, no one died as a result.

the rat population probably threw a party, but, still, I don’t think that’s comparable to not having fire service or police

Bosch

February 24th, 2011
11:38 am

USinUK — awwww, I can’t believe you posted that song — I used to sing that to my daughter every night when she was little…..

…..now I’m all verklempt.

Bosch

February 24th, 2011
11:39 am

USinUK,

Well, tell that to those wild racoons with rabies….

USinUK

February 24th, 2011
11:39 am

03 – not necessarily – you should see what’s going on here with on-again-off-again Tube strikes – people understand when the cause is just and when it isn’t.

0311/0317 - 1811/1801

February 24th, 2011
11:39 am

Mick:

I said earlier I had an accounting degree.

BBA from UGA to be specific.

USinUK

February 24th, 2011
11:40 am

Bosch – awwww … me, too! that’s so sweet :-)

George W

February 24th, 2011
11:40 am

USinUK…..Do you have any idea how much the starting salary is of a NYC sanatation worker? Look at their salary after 5 years. I bet you will be surprised.

Keep up the good fight!

February 24th, 2011
11:40 am

So Scout Zero.. your accounting degree was co-op based?

Bosch

February 24th, 2011
11:40 am

“That just gives them more bargaining power ! Just the threat of a strike would mean HIGHER PAY AND BENEFITS !”

OH GOD, NO, NOT THAT!!! HEAVEN FORBID!!!