I think you missed the point because I said that businesses need to be comfortable taking risks. So when is that?
It's when they have an expectation there's going to a future consumer for their product. Apple is comfortable investing right now because their products attract revenue. And that would apply to any other business. And none of that has anything to do with being scared of Obama; it's being scared of no customers and no revenue. Tax cuts don't fix that. BMW is doing great. Audi is looking to build plants in the US. They have a reasonable scenario that shows consumers buying their products. It's the consumer. If they're not buying then business aren't happy and right now they're only buying a little. More tax cuts doesn't fix that. You could raise taxes on google, apple, BMW, Audi, etc and they'll keep investing. You can lower taxes on borders down to zero and theyll still not be building any more stores and still be bankrupt. Sent from my iPad On Jul 23, 2011, at 5:07 PM, Sam <sammyc...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Grussgott <grussg...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Well, no, my assumption is not that we trick anybody; its simply that in >> order to have demand people have to "feel" comfortable taking a risk. That >> takes institutions and a growing economy. As an example think of buying a >> house - that's a pretty big bold bet on the future of the economy! > > You missed the point, in order for the economy to recover we need > businesses to feel safe taking the risks and that will create more > consumers that will not buy iPads but higher quality foods and better > ac's or whatever they've been holding back on since they are out of > work. When more people are working the ones with jobs feel safer with > theirs and the need to squirrel money subsides a bit. > >> As to whether the stimulus was Keynes or not, your talking point - because >> it's not actually any type of decent reasoning - is wrong. The stimulus was >> both much too little and very politically targeted. I.e. It was simply more >> discretionary spending with a teeny tiny amount of stimulus. > > It was a failure as it always is. The typical liberal approach is to > keep trying a failed policy and hoping eventually it will work. Than > claim it wasn't implemented correctly. > >> Hardly Keynesian. So no we haven't tried that at all. > > Besides throwing money at all the wrong places with stimulus and cash > for clunkers we're now talking QE3. > > >> However I'm sure you missed that part on fox news, what with all the Murdock >> spying coverage that channel is blasting 24/7. > > Did Jon Stewart teach you that line? > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:340915 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
