On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 9:50 AM, <spudboy...@aol.com> wrote:
> Fur sure, that was the truth. Now we got's shale gas, which seems to pay a
> lot better, is safer to go after, and is cleaner, carbon-wise. Unless you
> are buying into technological unemployment (robots, software) then we have
> to face the fact. BHO's Keynesian way has fallen on its ass and has stayed
> down, like a fighter throwing a fight, after a payoff.
I've read Keynesians like Paul Krugman say that the level of stimulus was
actually not enough by Keynesian standards (and too much went to tax cuts),
but certainly the US economy with its level of stimulus did much better
than most of the states that more thoroughly rejected Keynesianism and
instead chose austerity in the midst of a recession, like the UK...see
various graphs at http://graphsagainstausterity.tumblr.com/ (click on any
graph to see the original article it came from)
> Increased government employment doesn't seem to generate tax revenue very
Except government employment hasn't increased under Obama, it's actually
been steadily decreasing during his presidency (apart from a brief spike
when the decennial census was taken and they needed a lot of temporary
census workers), due mostly to the Republicans in Congress, whereas under
George W. Bush government employment was steadily increasing (this
collapsing of the public sector is probably contributing quite a bit to the
slow recovery). See the two graphs showing private sector and public sector
jobs under Bush and Obama here:
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.