My take is this: Either it's just a meaningless political gimmick, which will piss off progressives and fail to win any conservative or independent support, or it's a disastrous policy that will worsen the economy and piss off progressives while failing to win any conservative or independent support.

Yay, good idea! Just what you need right now.

Seriously, if he follows through on this, it's easily the stupidest thing I've seen him do.

He doesn't seem to understand that nothing he does short of renouncing the Democratic party, bleaching his skin white, and getting a picture of Ronald Reagan tattooed on his ass is ever going to appease the Republicans.

^...nor appease thinking, dissatisfied Americans who never voted for anyone knowing a modern president is nothing more than a slap in the face to the constitution and unalienable rights of humans all over the planet.

down vote

what is the freeze really? I had a brilliant stroke of brilliance... it's a meaningless political gesture that pathetically pisses me off and doesn't even excite the most superficial independent.

for once we all agree on something!

BTW, Choggie makes me appear intelligible. I love that.

We have a tax-freeze in Denmark right now, it's just stupid, because it means that the government just have to go around the taxes and collect the cash other ways.

I know I'm swimming against the tide here, but it's a good move which should be moderated by the situation in a year's time.

Maddow is correct about economics 101, but she gives no indication she understands anything beyond that here.

You have to remember that the US is in a huge deficit. Perhaps not as large as Japan's relative to GNP, but the largest in absolute terms. The point here is that the size of the US economy is so large world credit supply will at some start to become less and less tolerable of more borrowing.

Higher public or for that matter private debts inevitably raise the risk of borrowing in a country. Higher rates of borrowing encourage investors who are looking for high interest rates on their returns. That appreciates the currency. What an appreciation of the currency would do is make US exports uncompetitive, which essentially destroys the competitive edge of the economy. Together with higher borrowing costs, that would be particularly crippling. Yes as a counter-argument it does make necessary imports such as energy supplies cheaper, but on the whole it's indisputably damaging.

While expansionary fiscal policy is necessary during a crisis such as this one, it is equally important to signal to the market that you're not going to either create inflation through over stimulating the economy and you're not going to be forced into a position of printing money to honor your deficit. By promising to reduce expansionary spending in the future, you're getting the best of both worlds.

Deficits are unpopular. Tax increases are unpopular.

Spending cuts are popular as long as you aren't specific about what you want to cut.

>> ^RedSky:
While expansionary fiscal policy is necessary during a crisis such as this one, it is equally important to signal to the market that you're not going to either create inflation through over stimulating the economy and you're not going to be forced into a position of printing money to honor your deficit. By promising to reduce expansionary spending in the future, you're getting the best of both worlds.


This is spot on in terms of economic analysis, except for one bit -- there's no indication we're anywhere near the crises you mention, and market indicators actually show that the markets are wanting us to borrow more (interest rates are actually going down).

Based on the actual language Obama used, he basically said the spending freeze would take place after the crisis had ended and when recovery is well on its way. I think that's perfectly reasonable. However, he did put a timeframe on it, but it was just "in 2011," which could easily mean the freeze "starts" on Dec 31st, 2011. Also, as much as I hate to say it, one thing the last year has shown is that Obama sure as hell doesn't have a problem letting a deadline slip if it's necessary (like with health care), or even merely expedient (like with repealing Don't Ask Don't Tell). If unemployment is still not coming down by the end of 2011, he'll need to go into full FDR mode unless he wants to be succeeded by a Republican in 2012, and watch the Democratic party die off completely.

Long story short, I'm not worried. It's a stupid gimmicky way to try and put out an olive branch to conservatives, and while I'd like to think that people are too smart to fall for it, I suspect it will actually resonate with some conservative-leaning independents as a gesture showing that he knows the debt and deficit is a concern, and that cutting spending most certainly is on the table.

Moving this video to NetRunner's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.

Regardless of what's happening in the short term, I think in the long term it's something to be worried about. China has given indication that it wishes to diversify from US treasury bond holdings numerous times. That in and of itself will have a compounding effect over time. A crisis isn't necessary either, a genuine crisis would be an appreciation followed by an abrupt depreciation brought about by an investor and foreign sovereign fund run as investors lose faith in the federal government being able to pay off the debt. Merely an incremental interest rate rise and appreciation would hurt competitiveness.

Do agree that '2011' is horribly vague, but then it does offer some much needed flexibility as well, while still sending a signal.
>> ^NetRunner:
>> ^RedSky:
While expansionary fiscal policy is necessary during a crisis such as this one, it is equally important to signal to the market that you're not going to either create inflation through over stimulating the economy and you're not going to be forced into a position of printing money to honor your deficit. By promising to reduce expansionary spending in the future, you're getting the best of both worlds.

This is spot on in terms of economic analysis, except for one bit -- there's no indication we're anywhere near the crises you mention, and market indicators actually show that the markets are wanting us to borrow more (interest rates are actually going down).
Based on the actual language Obama used, he basically said the spending freeze would take place after the crisis had ended and when recovery is well on its way. I think that's perfectly reasonable. However, he did put a timeframe on it, but it was just "in 2011," which could easily mean the freeze "starts" on Dec 31st, 2011. Also, as much as I hate to say it, one thing the last year has shown is that Obama sure as hell doesn't have a problem letting a deadline slip if it's necessary (like with health care), or even merely expedient (like with repealing Don't Ask Don't Tell). If unemployment is still not coming down by the end of 2011, he'll need to go into full FDR mode unless he wants to be succeeded by a Republican in 2012, and watch the Democratic party die off completely.
Long story short, I'm not worried. It's a stupid gimmicky way to try and put out an olive branch to conservatives, and while I'd like to think that people are too smart to fall for it, I suspect it will actually resonate with some conservative-leaning independents as a gesture showing that he knows the debt and deficit is a concern, and that cutting spending most certainly is on the table.

*promote

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued - promote requested by RedSky.

You know, we could always start taxing the rich again, and cutting back on our obscene military spending.

We could do much more good, and negatively impact much fewer people.

>> ^rougy:
You know, we could always start taxing the rich again, and cutting back on our obscene military spending.
We could do much more good, and negatively impact much fewer people.


Now THAT'S just crazy talk! What are you some kind of commie bastard!

/sarcasm.

You notice you never hear anyone whinging on about big government suggesting cutting the Department of Defense or Homeland Security?

They're happy to spend tax money on blowing up brown people and security theatre, but to hell with properly funding public education or universal healthcare.

the conservatives will never ever ever ever ever ever be pleased with anything he does, ever. and hes only pissing off everyone else.
so mr. president, with your 1 term.... give us a green and updated infrastructure, give us more high speed rails, pass meaningful climate change legislation, bitch slap wall street, actually fix healthcare, end some fucking wars, repeal dont ask dont tell.

@peggedbea: Now that's how you move the overton window left!

@RedSky: I think we're in complete agreement, then.

So, who are the Democrats going to put up for election in 2012?