Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Krugman: "Obama jobs plan...significantly bolder and better than I expected"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 10:40 PM
Original message
Krugman: "Obama jobs plan...significantly bolder and better than I expected"
Edited on Thu Sep-08-11 10:41 PM by ProSense

Setting Their Hair on Fire

By PAUL KRUGMAN

First things first: I was favorably surprised by the new Obama jobs plan, which is significantly bolder and better than I expected. Its not nearly as bold as the plan Id want in an ideal world. But if it actually became law, it would probably make a significant dent in unemployment.

Of course, it isnt likely to become law, thanks to G.O.P. opposition. Nor is anything else likely to happen that will do much to help the 14 million Americans out of work. And that is both a tragedy and an outrage.

<...>

O.K., about the Obama plan: It calls for about $200 billion in new spending much of it on things we need in any case, like school repair, transportation networks, and avoiding teacher layoffs and $240 billion in tax cuts. That may sound like a lot, but it actually isnt. The lingering effects of the housing bust and the overhang of household debt from the bubble years are creating a roughly $1 trillion per year hole in the U.S. economy, and this plan which wouldnt deliver all its benefits in the first year would fill only part of that hole. And its unclear, in particular, how effective the tax cuts would be at boosting spending.

<...>

The good news in all this is that by going bigger and bolder than expected, Mr. Obama may finally have set the stage for a political debate about job creation. For, in the end, nothing will be done until the American people demand action.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 10:53 PM
Response to Original message
1. How many billions (trillions?) do the war machines get every year?
Makes my blood boil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. The Department of Defense budget isn't a secret. It's $530 billion for FY2012.
Plus $118 billion cost for Iraq and Afghanistan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dsc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. actually some of it is a secret
though probably not a very significant part.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 12:44 PM
Response to Reply #9
17. The appropriations themselves aren't secret--how they spend it is.
That's why "black projects" are typically covered over by other non-secret programs. For instance, you might see a $75 million dollar line item for modernizing housing at US military bases, but in reality only $35 million goes to that purpose; the other $40 million might be diverted off to research on newer generations of low-observable aircraft.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nevernose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 11:59 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. That's not the military budget, though
That's the defense department budget. Nuclear weapons are under the Department of Energy; the army of mercenaries are under the Dept. Of State; veteran's affairs are under the VA. And et cetera.

The REAL military budget is more like 1.2 trillion. (I'd post a link, but I'm on the phone. Google it and mother jones).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #11
18. That's laughable on the face of it.
The annual budget of the Department of Veterans Affairs is about $90 billion. The Department of State, $50 billion. Department of Energy, $30 billion. Even all those put together you'd barely get a fifth of the way from the DOD budget to $1.2 trillion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vattel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #18
23. But you are leaving out some big ones, e.g.,
Obama's budget request for Iraq and Afgahnistan (117 billion). What kicks it up to 1.2 trillion on some estimates is including debt on defense expenditures.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Vattel/3
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 11:46 PM
Response to Reply #23
30. No, I already included expenditures for Iraq and Afghanistan.
1.2 trillion is simply a massively wrong figure. There's no other way to put it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vattel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-10-11 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. well, just add up the figures in my link.
if you add the debt payments, it's not far off
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-10-11 08:03 PM
Response to Reply #23
32. You're also adding in the FBI, NASA, DHS, and it's still not even close. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vattel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-11 06:49 AM
Response to Reply #32
33. I'm only adding in the national security parts of FBI, NASA & DHS
and it is close. With debt thrown in it is over a trillion. Without the debt, it is roughly 900 billion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 08:26 PM
Response to Reply #1
22. At least its going in the right direction
what helps me keep perspective is stating expectations - such as, what would make me happy re the defense budget this year? After so many years of expansion, a simple reduction would make me happy - what we got, in fact, is a large and long-term reduction, almost entirely out of Iraq, a draw-down in Afghanistan, an extremely limited and effective effort in Libya, and most importantly an overall plan for long-term decline. My blood has boiled over that issue from time to time, but its on the back-burner now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakemewhenitsover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 10:53 PM
Response to Original message
2. Rec'd to 7 = 7
I know everyone says this on every thread, but... I can't believe someone would unrec this thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Number23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #2
21. Rec #63 here!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tuesday Afternoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #2
29. Rec #73 here
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MilesColtrane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 10:54 PM
Response to Original message
3. K&R
Nice to see Krugman say something positive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #3
16. you mean nice that he agrees with you this time. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cherokeeprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 11:00 PM
Response to Original message
4. Does "The Plan" exist on paper anywhere?
Has it been written and has Krugman seen an advance copy of it? Because if it hasn't, and he hasn't, how in the world can he say it "is significantly bigger and bolder than I expected"?

He keeps referring to "it". Where can we find "it"? I'd like to read it myself.

How the hell can someone describe something without having actually seen it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Here is a
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cherokeeprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 11:05 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Thank You. I'd looked and couldn't find this much information anywhere.
But just to be straight, it's not in the form of a bill that's ready to be submitted to Congress?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. It hasn't yet been submitted to Congress.
That's apparently next week. No idea if the bill text is public yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 09:14 PM
Response to Reply #5
25. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
Logical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 11:28 PM
Response to Original message
10. So the GDP likes Krugman now! Horray!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressoid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 02:29 AM
Response to Original message
12. Rec.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stuart G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 07:33 AM
Response to Original message
13. k and r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 08:17 AM
Response to Original message
14. Who disapproves of Krugman's comment? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. Those who have been cheering him...
They've thrown him under the bus now.

Sadly, Krugman is more positive than a substantial portion of DU today.

Pathetic... effing pathetic.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillrockin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 08:19 AM
Response to Original message
15. More from Krugman's column:
O.K., about the Obama plan: It calls for about $200 billion in new spending much of it on things we need in any case, like school repair, transportation networks, and avoiding teacher layoffs and $240 billion in tax cuts. That may sound like a lot, but it actually isnt. The lingering effects of the housing bust and the overhang of household debt from the bubble years are creating a roughly $1 trillion per year hole in the U.S. economy, and this plan which wouldnt deliver all its benefits in the first year would fill only part of that hole. And its unclear, in particular, how effective the tax cuts would be at boosting spending.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 02:42 PM
Response to Original message
20. K & R
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 09:01 PM
Response to Original message
24. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 09:23 PM
Response to Original message
26. As Krugman says: Hooray for the best we can expect from this president.
This is your idea of a ringing endorsement?

Krugman, as usual, is right again. In this administration of constantly lowered expectations, this tiny effort is to be lauded as a good thing. The words and the passion were there. But in line with most of Krugman's thoughts about what comes from this administration - too little - too late.

Had the president decided to do something when he was elected - you know when he had a mandate and the support of the country - this would have been a walk. And he wouldn't have had to pander to the republicans with the medicare stuff.

Oh. Well. It's what we've got. it is the new normal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 09:39 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-09-11 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. American Jobs Act: A Significant Boost to GDP and Employment
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Jul 15th 2019, 07:53 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC