sabbadoo32

Alternative Energy Storage Needs to Take Baby Steps Before It Can Run

I'd be in favor of converting the government's non-security or law envorcment fleet of vehicles to hybrid or PEV. It would be a big order for Detroit, and it would give us a good opportunity to test the effects on the electrical grid.

Why Would We Want to Bail Out This Homeowner?

What I'd like to see happen is a synthesis of Jon's and tcorn's comments. I would like to see people who signed liar loans and the like prosecuted. I also want to see laws that allow the builder to keep rents without paying for the properties changed.

What I am curious about is, to what extent did the industry prey on people? I've seen the ads for "solving all your problems with a HELOC", or "finding the home of your dreams no matter your credit." The people who responded weren't graduates of Rocket Science Academy. And the regulators were...well the Bushies replaced the regulators with yes men.

NPR's "Big Pool of Money" does a good job of summing up predatory lending.

So I want to see everyone pay. But I want to see the predators pay more.

Obama's 2.5 Million Job Stimulus: We Need a Scalpel, Not a Shotgun

Additionally, I think an influx of workers would force construction and labor unions to look hard at their own formal and informal rules. They absolutely cannot afford to be seen as an impediment to economic reform. So they'll have to accept the blacks and latinos they historically find ways to reject. I think an infusion of membership would put downward pressure on dues, and prompt reform in that area. It is a long-overdue conversation that unions need to have with themselves.

Obama's 2.5 Million Job Stimulus: We Need a Scalpel, Not a Shotgun

I have to agree with DavidWeitz. There are a lot of people who some of our more craven citizens would say were "on the dole". There's more upside for low-income people to hold a better job under Obama's plan than under Clinton's welfare reform program. There's also more upside for my friends who are civil engineers and the companies they own and/or work for.

Ferguson has an excellent idea as well. Why can't this new workforce also repair foreclosed homes that have been trashed? Not necessarily replace expensive marble, but at the very least put up new drywall, fix damage, etc?

How Will Temporary Decline in Oil Prices Impact Energy Sector?

I'm interested in what the author is basing his opinion of HEV's on. I see vehicles like the Ford Escape Hybrid as a godsend to families with 2 or 3 kids. Lots of space and 25-30 mpg in the city. I think the concept of electric-assist is excellent. It may rise to the top. But not before the first round of HEV's and electric cars that will hit American showrooms 2009-2012.

I also am concerned about battery power v. highway speeds. The vehicles that I have seen, HEV, electric, have the same if not better driving characteristics than a Honda Fit, or a base Toyota Corolla. What vehicles is the author referring to?

Lastly is infrastructure. Very problematic. If the market moves to 7-10% adoption of green cars in the next few years, how long will it take before utility companies move toward adjusting the grid? One good thing about utilities having a government partner is that it should (I said should) be easier to prod the electric companies to upgrade the grid.

The big X factor for all of this is the economy, and how Obama structures incentives to buy new cars. If he can shift pent up demand for economical cars (not econoboxes) to what I see coming in 2010-2012, then I believe we'll see oil and utilities reacting to the consumer

Should We Really Bail Out the Big Three Automakers with $73.20 Per Hour Labor?

$73.20/hr is a red herring. The two real issues facing Detroit are health care and shifting the industry to hybrid and electric vehicles.

Nationalizing health care would guarantee quality health care for all, and cut that hourly wage number, giving Detroit an additional ability to compete. I say additional, because they could have shifted to hybrid and electric 3 years ago. They could have beaten Toyota to market or been second with that model car.

Some of Detroit's problems weren't visited upon them by the baaad unions or the shifty Japanese. It was a result of their own laziness.

Reinventing the Auto Industry: Lessons Learned from IBM

The similarities exist in the macro, as well as for descriptive purposes. His point is valid. Detroit is asking for money to stop today's bleeding, and isn't necessarily ready to announce their intention of committing to a hybrid/electric fleet.

Taking money from the government should really be like making a deal with the devil. In this case, we need to create jobs and clean up the air by taking advantage of the market opportunity that's presented by hybrid and electric vehicles.

Non-Farm Payrolls: Enough for a Fed Rate Cut?

Dropping rates within the next 75 days won't do a thing. As we all know credit is too tight. Banks don't trust each other, much less the average person on the street. In Chicago, banks are requiring 12-15% down on people with 700 credit scores for car loans. AND that's only if they're not purchasing an SUV.

So lower rates may be a good thing. But it's a wasted effort until someone wants to loan money again.

Housing: RTC 2.0 Will Not Fix the Root Problem

Maybe you meant "unsold inventory". Housing prices cannot get healthy at all until the excess inventory numbers decline.

Is McCain's Tax Plan Really Any Different From Current Policy?

Matt,

The top 5% were supposed to use the money from the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts to drive the economy, create jobs, and all the other stuff the GOP said they'd do. As we all know, they didn't. The worst recovery in the history of the republic was financed by the middle class through credit card and home equity debt. The top 5% kept their money.

Since they did nothing with what we gave them, they need to give it back.

Is McCain's Tax Plan Really Any Different From Current Policy?

Excellent points Diane.

As McCain's campaign manager said last week, the election for the Republicans cannot be on the issues. It must be on personality, on fresh faces, on images that have not bedrock in reality.

As mayor of Wasilla, Sarah Palin raised the sales tax, and left the town $13 million in debt. No one has mentioned McCain's membership in the Keating Five scandal in the 80's. A very good Google.

Bottom line, the word is getting out on the paucity of McCain's claims. Two weeks ago the empasis was on experience, now it's all about change. Next week it will be about 'beans' and the week after that 'peas'.

All I know is that had Republicans wanted that permanent majority they bragged about, they should have given the 2001 & 2003 tax cuts to the middle class instead of the rich.

And I honestly wouldn't be surprised if next week McCain said he'd change his tax cut policy to do just that.

More on 'Buffett Pie' and Paying For Tax Cuts

Good points. Points lost in the current shuffle. I would say let the Bush tax cuts expire. It's very evident that after 7 and 5 years of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, the theory of supply side economics as primary economic driver has been proven false. It helped, but spending borne of consumer debt did the heavy lifting.

So let's allow the tax cuts to expire. I'm also with you in letting them expire on a staggered basis. However, I would shift them to households that make up to $250k/year. These are the households that will inject the money into the economy faster than their richer counterparts. The money won't sit in a bank or investment account. It will be spent locally and at national chains. It will help reduce household debt either directly, or by allowing other money to be put to pay down debt. As household balance sheets stabilize, the extra money will again start going into savings and investment accounts, because the middle class will need retirement money as well.

So shift the Bush tax cuts and let them expire in a staggered manner, perhaps with the last of the benefits ending in 2016. We need a burst of consumer spending at the middle class level right now that's not connected to a HELOC, or a credit card.

Which Improves First - The Stock Market or the Economy?

We can "drill here, drill now". There's plenty of leased land available to oil companies to do that. However, there are constraints on man and equipment to do that. Doing some Googling will lead you to oil drilling industry information that tells you boats, derricks exploratory equipment, etc are currently leased through 2010 on existing projects. It's not a democrat trick, it's the fact that the industry is always looking for new oil somewhere.

Personally I believe market bottom will largely coincide with a significant decrease in unsold housing inventories and a stabilization in commercial real estate. Household savings need to rebound, household credit balances need to decrease. Home values need to begin to rise again. When the middle class feels comfortable about spending money again, we'll get our recovery--which should coincide with a stock market rally. These are the things that will lead to a sustained recovery.

Real Disposable Income Up in Q2

I was intrigued by the headline, as I had yet to open the email with the info from the government. I re-read the head, saw the graph, and felt my head start to spin.

Hey Mark, you've got an advanced degree. Use it.

Obama Is Bad for the Economy - Barron's

Eli,

You're rehashing the same arguments for the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.

We gave the top 1% a lot of money in 2001 and even more in 2003. Either they didn't spend it, OR they're not enough of them to run this economy in the way the political economists (that's a scary two words) assured us they would. They didn't even come close.

It's very clear that for the past 5 years our economy was driven by MIDDLE-CLASS consumer spending based on increased debt-whether it be credit card, HELOC or whatever.

It's clear that this has been the weakest recovery. Weakest job growth. Weakest period of consumer sentiment while in the midst of a "boom." Negative household savings. And the list goes on.

But it's been very strong in divisive political bombast, which is good for those that sell hot air.

Were the top 1% theory true, then we should have given the stimulus to the them instead of the middle class, right? We gave the money to the middle class because we knew they'd spend it, and quickly at that. Were household debt not so high I'd imagine they'd have spent more of the stimulus.

We do need to keep taxes low, and fair.

But the past 8 years have allowed us to see how supply-side economics really works. It has been proven that it's a tactic for temporary revival of the economy and a very effective political tool. It is not a rational grand strategy for managing the republic.