Page 15 of 137 FirstFirst ... 513141516172565115 ... LastLast
Results 281 to 300 of 2725
  1. #281
    Quote Originally Posted by PackMan97 View Post
    Yes, I'm aware that there is a panel of people that officially declare the beginning and end of things like recessions and we aren't officially in one until "they" say we are

    For the next few years I think we see parts if the economy go in and out of growth periods all out of sync with each other. It's going to make for some nasty politics as both sides will laugh onto the narrative that best fits their needs at the time. Can't wait!
    I listened to a radio interview with the Chair of the NBER panel and it was fascinating. I spent a few minutes trying to dig it up, but couldn’t. Given my listening habits, it was probably on Marketplace, Planet Money or The Indicator.

    I agree with you that we usually know we are in a recession before the recession is officially declared. And that was one of the points raised by the Chair when he was asked why the Board doesn’t just declare a recession when they see two consecutive quarters of economic growth. His answer was that their mandate was backward looking, with timing based on when sufficient data come available. This is compelling to me, since preliminary information is often revised later when more data is available.

    People who want current/forward looking analysis have good resources based on the preliminary data.
    Carolina delenda est

  2. #282
    Quote Originally Posted by cato View Post
    I listened to a radio interview with the Chair of the NBER panel and it was fascinating. I spent a few minutes trying to dig it up, but couldn’t. Given my listening habits, it was probably on Marketplace, Planet Money or The Indicator.

    I agree with you that we usually know we are in a recession before the recession is officially declared. And that was one of the points raised by the Chair when he was asked why the Board doesn’t just declare a recession when they see two consecutive quarters of economic growth. His answer was that their mandate was backward looking, with timing based on when sufficient data come available. This is compelling to me, since preliminary information is often revised later when more data is available.

    People who want current/forward looking analysis have good resources based on the preliminary data.
    The COVID recession was declared exceptionally fast by officials (for their standards). But that certainly was a unique situation. They declared in early June that it started in March. Then in July said it ended in April. The two month recession was the shortest ever.
       

  3. #283
    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...-the-midterms/

    Good Nate Silver article looking at how things MAY be turning against Dems after a very strong summer.
       

  4. #284
    Quote Originally Posted by ClemmonsDevil View Post
    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...-the-midterms/

    Good Nate Silver article looking at how things MAY be turning against Dems after a very strong summer.
    In recent years there always seems to be a slight shift in favor of the GOP in the final couple of weeks before an election.
       

  5. #285
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Outside Philly
    Why would a Florida congressperson vote against FEMA funds for his state after Ian?
       

  6. #286
    Quote Originally Posted by bundabergdevil View Post
    Why would a Florida congressperson vote against FEMA funds for his state after Ian?
    Further evidence that I understand less and less as I get older.
       

  7. #287
    Quote Originally Posted by bundabergdevil View Post
    Why would a Florida congressperson vote against FEMA funds for his state after Ian?
    This is an impossible situation for adherents of true federalism. There are people who firmly believe in limited government and that states should essentially be left to their own devices to fund pretty much anything that isn't the military. They will vote against any legislation that funds anything in the federal government. Which is absolutely fine and has some significant intellectual underpinnings from the early days of the republic in the federalism vs anti-federalism arguments. So that's all fine. I actually have more respect for someone who literally always votes this way rather than someone who trots out these ideas when it affects other states (especially those mostly governed by the competing party), but screams for federal funds when their state is hit. That is truly disgusting. Either way you should have to answer for that with the voters. But there are so few people in the middle that you can pretty much act with impunity as long as you can win your primary.
       

  8. #288
    Quote Originally Posted by ClemmonsDevil View Post
    This is an impossible situation for adherents of true federalism. There are people who firmly believe in limited government and that states should essentially be left to their own devices to fund pretty much anything that isn't the military. They will vote against any legislation that funds anything in the federal government. Which is absolutely fine and has some significant intellectual underpinnings from the early days of the republic in the federalism vs anti-federalism arguments. So that's all fine. I actually have more respect for someone who literally always votes this way rather than someone who trots out these ideas when it affects other states (especially those mostly governed by the competing party), but screams for federal funds when their state is hit. That is truly disgusting. Either way you should have to answer for that with the voters. But there are so few people in the middle that you can pretty much act with impunity as long as you can win your primary.
    I can respect someone that has the courage of one's convictions but the congressman voted for $15 Billion in Irma aid in 2017. Now he votes against what is essentially a starter package of $15 million. There is little chance that this package and the next bigger one will not pass. If I was a cynic, I would say the congressman gets to have his cake and eat it too. Even Rand Paul feel on his sword and requested funds for the tornadoes in KY.

  9. #289
    Quote Originally Posted by Kdogg View Post
    I can respect someone that has the courage of one's convictions but the congressman voted for $15 Billion in Irma aid in 2017. Now he votes against what is essentially a starter package of $15 million. There is little chance that this package and the next bigger one will not pass. If I was a cynic, I would say the congressman gets to have his cake and eat it too. Even Rand Paul feel on his sword and requested funds for the tornadoes in KY.
    Oh I think that's 100% accurate. And I'm not defending it. It is at least consistent though.
       

  10. #290
    https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/01/polit...lls/index.html

    Call me crazy, but I don't think Republican on Republican violence is in the playbook this close to the election.
       

  11. #291
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Outside Philly
    Quote Originally Posted by ClemmonsDevil View Post
    This is an impossible situation for adherents of true federalism. There are people who firmly believe in limited government and that states should essentially be left to their own devices to fund pretty much anything that isn't the military. They will vote against any legislation that funds anything in the federal government. Which is absolutely fine and has some significant intellectual underpinnings from the early days of the republic in the federalism vs anti-federalism arguments. So that's all fine. I actually have more respect for someone who literally always votes this way rather than someone who trots out these ideas when it affects other states (especially those mostly governed by the competing party), but screams for federal funds when their state is hit. That is truly disgusting. Either way you should have to answer for that with the voters. But there are so few people in the middle that you can pretty much act with impunity as long as you can win your primary.

    Eh, I disagree. Federalists are perhaps more targeted and have a higher threshold for when and to what extent FEMA is deployed but they also understand that certain natural disasters overwhelm state and local authorities - and agree that is the appropriate trigger. Ian qualifies.

    Electorally speaking, WTF?
       

  12. #292
    Quote Originally Posted by bundabergdevil View Post
    Eh, I disagree. Federalists are perhaps more targeted and have a higher threshold for when and to what extent FEMA is deployed but they also understand that certain natural disasters overwhelm state and local authorities - and agree that is the appropriate trigger. Ian qualifies.

    Electorally speaking, WTF?
    I agree mostly. Previous poster pointed out that the congressman in question voted for a previous spending bill under a different president. I honestly don't think there really are many true federalists. But many will use the label when convenient.

    And he is electorally safe. So he can do whatever he wants.
       

  13. #293
    Kinda same concept as expanding Medicaid as some states refused to accept federal dollars to do so because they're against it in the first place.
       

  14. #294
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by ClemmonsDevil View Post
    https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/01/polit...lls/index.html

    Call me crazy, but I don't think Republican on Republican violence is in the playbook this close to the election.
    There are two different Republican parties now, at least in some quarters.

  15. #295
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Outside Philly
    Quote Originally Posted by ClemmonsDevil View Post
    I agree mostly. Previous poster pointed out that the congressman in question voted for a previous spending bill under a different president. I honestly don't think there really are many true federalists. But many will use the label when convenient.

    And he is electorally safe. So he can do whatever he wants.
    We should check in on Michael Fanone’s thoughts on MG.
       

  16. #296
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    There are two different Republican parties now, at least in some quarters.
    I'm not sure this is true from a power perspective.
       

  17. #297
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by ClemmonsDevil View Post
    I'm not sure this is true from a power perspective.
    Not saying they are equal, they are not. But a divided party faces certain headwinds that may prove fatal in purple areas.
       

  18. #298
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    Not saying they are equal, they are not. But a divided party faces certain headwinds that may prove fatal in purple areas.
    Oh. Seeing that perspective I agree with you then.
       

  19. #299
    Quote Originally Posted by bundabergdevil View Post
    We should check in on Michael Fanone’s thoughts on MG.
    Does Michael know Mountain Girl?
       

  20. #300
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Chicago
    Quote Originally Posted by OldPhiKap View Post
    There are two different Republican parties now, at least in some quarters.
    Not in terms of their voting on issue before Congress. That's a tough tightrope for an anti-Trump Republican to walk when they voted, as nearly all did, with Trump 90+% of the time and none show any consistent interest in bipartisanship on important issues.
    Last edited by Chicago 1995; 10-03-2022 at 10:31 AM. Reason: typos

Similar Threads

  1. 2022-23 TV Ratings Thread
    By awhom111 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 06-14-2023, 12:32 AM
  2. Midterm Elections 2018
    By Udaman in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 1869
    Last Post: 05-15-2019, 01:58 PM
  3. Replies: 1979
    Last Post: 11-08-2012, 10:09 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •