Intermarkets' Privacy Policy
Support


Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!


Contact
Ace:
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
CBD:
cbd at cutjibnewsletter.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com


Recent Entries
Absent Friends
Captain Whitebread 2026
Jon Ekdahl 2026
Jay Guevara 2025
Jim Sunk New Dawn 2025
Jewells45 2025
Bandersnatch 2024
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022
Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022
OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published. Contact OrangeEnt for info:
maildrop62 at proton dot me
Cutting The Cord And Email Security
Moron Meet-Ups

Texas MoMe 2026: 10/16/2026-10/17/2026 Corsicana,TX
Contact Ben Had for info





















« Charge: Rent Raised Sixfold On Homeless Shelter Because Proprietor Is a Black Republican | Main | Bloggers: A Growing Peril »
December 28, 2005

2006's Economy Same As 2005's: Disaster!

Democratic Politicians, Paul Krugman To Be Hardest Hit

A fifth straight year of economic expansion in 2006 promises to mean new jobs, higher pay, and maybe even fatter investment portfolios for millions of Americans.

...

There's no guarantee that the economy will actually match current expectations of 3.4 percent growth next year. But of more than 50 business economists surveyed by Blue Chip Economic Indicators, all but five see growth of 3 percent or higher. The lowest forecast is 2.6 percent. The upshot for those who work, shop, and invest would be a solid but not exciting environment.

"I think we'll see decent income growth and decent job growth," says Nariman Behravesh, chief economist at Global Insight in Lexington, Mass. "The average household will be better off, but moderately."

The consensus forecast calls for:

• Rising pay. Disposable incomes will rise by 3.2 percent, after inflation, more than double this year's gain.

• Costlier borrowing. ... [though] small upticks from current levels.

• Moderate inflation. The consumer price index will rise 3.0 percent during 2006, down slightly from 2005.

• Healthy profits. Corporate earnings will grow 7.9 percent, but that's less than half the pace of 2005....

• A strong job market. Unemployment to remain level at 5.0 percent. While job creation is not forecast in the Blue Chip survey, some experts call for job growth to reach 2 million for the year, higher than 2005 and much stronger than the early years of the current economic expansion.

Let me add in my own forecast that Iraq will be largely stabilized by the summer of 2006, prompting the withdrawal of 20,000 more troops, and I'd say that the Democrats are in a spot of trouble.

Then again, they can always rely on the nation's ravenous hunger for gay-marriage and Brokeback Mountain, as Frank Rich believes, to help them win the culture debate. So they've got that working for them.



posted by Ace at 10:18 PM
Comments



OT:
Somehow, through the magic of the web, I ran into the Cheney awards. I would like to make an early entry for next year.

Q: How does George Bush know when Laura has her period?

A: Cheney's dick tastes funny.

Posted by: moptop on December 28, 2005 11:14 PM

That did remind me: where is that weasel?
I have not heard from his lying mouth lately. Perhaps the MSM reallizes that all the pos is good for is as a revers barometer?

Posted by: hunter on December 28, 2005 11:51 PM

That weasel is hiding behind the NYT's pay per propaganda wall.

I share the Ace's view that by next year, say summer, the world is going to be a lot better place. Iraq will be functioning, maybe even peaceful. The economy is already going, but maybe the exuberance will reach Clinton-bubble triumphalism (without the internet bubble, natch).

How is the left going to spin those things, bitches?

Posted by: joein*c44 on December 29, 2005 12:12 AM

Yeah as long as Bush refuses to be fiscally responsible we will have quite a ride. All he has to do is to simultaneously continue to cut taxes and increase spending and all the economic indicators will read falsely positive, it is called a political business cycle. Your children will suffer for your incompetent decisions I hope you are happy.

{Shakes head in contempt and disgust}

Posted by: ProJecKt2501 on December 29, 2005 12:36 AM

I am happy.

{Reaches for glass of water, takes a sip}

Posted by: Bart on December 29, 2005 12:43 AM

Yeah as long as Bush refuses to be fiscally responsible we will have quite a ride. All he has to do is to simultaneously continue to cut taxes and increase spending and all the economic indicators will read falsely positive, it is called a political business cycle. Your children will suffer for your incompetent decisions I hope you are happy.

I'm sure I speak for a lot of commenters on this board when I say shut the fuck up.

Could your pathetic brand of partisanship be any more transparent? When Clinton was presiding over a stock market bubble, you fucking liberals were practically wanking to CNBC.

Now that the GDP is actually growing, you're still trying to make growth seem like a bad thing. Seriously, just put some money in the market and enjoy the ride.

Shake your head in 'contempt and disgust' all you want. It won't change the rate of economic growth. You fucking assholes. What's good for America really is bad for you, isn't it?

I can't tell you how much you and people like you piss me off, you little squeaking gerbil of a man.

Posted by: Lee Atwater on December 29, 2005 12:54 AM

Posted by Lee Atwater at December 29, 2005 12:54 AM

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Hahahahahaha

It's easier to say STFU and attack a straw man than refute the argument I presented.

What kind of asshole pimps their children’s future out for selfish short-term gain?

A Great Big Bleeding Asshole Like YOU, Lee Atwater!

Posted by: ProJecKt2501 on December 29, 2005 04:41 AM

Posted by Bart at December 29, 2005 12:43 AM

Obviously ignorance is bliss for an idiot like you!

Posted by: ProJecKt2501 on December 29, 2005 04:47 AM

Most of the deficit is composed of the entitlements, such as Social Security, that Democrats vehemently refuse to reform.

Posted by: Ross on December 29, 2005 08:42 AM

Federal tax revenues are actually up quite a bit.

Posted by: Ross on December 29, 2005 08:43 AM

There was an argument tucked away in all that nonsense? Make sense and you'll attract more than trolls - we're always happy to debate economics with Econ 101 grads like you.

I'll admit, the spending disturbs me quite a bit. I don't like it when they spend my hard-earned cash on pork projects.

Higher government spending alone would not cause the rates of sustained growth we're seeing. We haven't had a negative quarter in years, actual productivity is high and the employment rate has stayed low. Government spending is usually a short-term shot in the arm for economic growth, not a sustainer of it.

Posted by: Lee Atwater on December 29, 2005 09:07 AM

More than trolls? Shit, I meant to say trolls will attract more than flames or something like that.

Ah, sleep deprivation.

It works for you.

Posted by: Lee Atwater on December 29, 2005 09:08 AM

Hmph. Well, this weasel is abroad for the holidays.

It's still an open question in my mind whether what happened at the end of the Nineties was a true bubble, or simply an ordinary economy grossly misreported by the media.

It hardly would make a difference either way. Remember the magic incantation: when there is growth under a Republican, it's a "Decade of Greed"; when there is growth under a Democrat, it's a "Decade of Prosperity". Even if it's fake growth.

Posted by: S. Weasel on December 29, 2005 09:10 AM

I dunno troll mentioned something about false positives because of low taxes and high government spending.
The last refuge of the damned democrat, "but, but but, we are spending too much!" Yeah, as a percentage of what?
And who is so pure when it comes to spending as your "I didn't do it democrat?" Like the 80's (and probably the civil war), the only spending to be cut would be the kind that keeps the bad guys at bay. They also opposed the recent $50bil cut that passed. Pure as virgin, troll.

Over the past 5 years, dems have bitched and moaned every step of the way.

Posted by: joeindc44 on December 29, 2005 09:36 AM

Liberals dont like tax cuts it cuts off the money for their pork projects

Posted by: spurwing plover on December 29, 2005 10:21 AM

{Shakes head in contempt and disgust}


http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051229/pl_nm/economy_debtlimit_dc;_ylt=Asvo8woXDo2ZsGhBdE89GE0DW7oF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

Posted by: ProJecKt2501 on December 30, 2005 04:39 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?








Now Available!
The Deplorable Gourmet
A Horde-sourced Cookbook
[All profits go to charity]
Top Headlines
Chris
@chriswithans

aaahahaa.jpg


"Ahhhhh ahh I put my career on the line for Louise Lucas and Jay Jones thinking they'd vault me into presidential contention and we ended up costing Democrats 20 House seats and unleashing a Reverse Dobbs ahhhhh ahhh"
Forgotten 80s Mystery Click That Sums Up the Democrat Communist Party Today
Something is wrong as I hold you near
Somebody else holds your heart, yeah
You turn to me with your icy tears
And then it's raining, feels like it's raining
"It's f**king f**ked."
-- reportedly a genuine comment offered by a "senior Labour source"
Correction: I wrote that Labour is losing 88% (now 87%) of the seats it is "defending." I think that's wrong. The right way to say it is the seats they are contesting -- that is, they don't necessarily already hold these seats, but they have put up a candidate to run for the seat. It's still very bad but not as bad as losing 87% of the seats they already held.
Basil the Great
@BasilTheGreat

🚨ED MILIBAND [a Minister in Starmer's government] SAYS KEIR STARMER WILL RESIGN AS PRIME MINISTER

He has reportedly reassured Labour MP's that Starmer will be resigning following the disastrous results tonight

It's over
"The end of the two party system in the UK" as first the Fake Conservatives and now Labour chooses political suicide rather than simply STOPPING THE INVASION
Incidentally, the only reason this didn't already happen in the US is because of the Very Bad Orange Man (who is right on 85% of all policy calls and extremely, existentially right on 15% of them)
No political party that is NOT also a doomsday religious cult would EVER choose a cataclysmic loss -- and possible extinction as a party -- to support a toxically unpopular favoritism of NON-CITIZEN ILLEGAL MIGRANTS over actual citizen voters.

Only a cult does this.
Now they've lost 84%.
Annunziata Rees-Mogg
@zatzi
If this continues Labour loses 2,148 seats tonight.

That is much worse than the worst case predictions I’ve seen.

Cataclysmic

Update: They've now lost 88% of the seats they're defending. As I mentioned earlier, I think I heard that London will not bail them out, as many of those Labour seats will probably flip to "Muslim Independent" or Green. Detroit's 5am vote will not save them.
Yup, Labour is losing 80% of its seats...
The British Patriot
@TheBritLad

🚨 BREAKING: Labour have lost 80% of all seats contested as of 2:25 AM.<
br> If this continues, Keir Starmer will be out of office next week.

Reform has surged and projected to pick up between 1700-2100 seats.


Wow, up to 1700-2100 seats. It's not incredible that this is happening. It's incredible that the Davos crowd is so absolutely determined to privilege Muslim "migrants" over the actual native population who elects them, no matter how loudly the natives scream that they want to be prioritized, that they will gladly self-extinguish as a party rather than simply representing the interests of their own voters. Astonishing.
Remember, when they call other people "cultists" -- they are the ones so imprisoned in their social reinforcement and discipline bubbles that they will choose political death rather than dare upset the Karen Enforcement Officers of their cult.
Update: Now they've lost 83% of the seats they were defending.
(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges

Reform are basically wiping Labour out in the North. It's not a defeat. It's not even a rout. Labour are simply ceasing to exist.


Nick Lowles
@lowles_nick

Tonight’s results are calamitous for Labour. Not just for Keir Starmer's leadership, but for the very future of the party
STARMERGEDDON: In early returns, Reform gains 135 seats, Labour loses 90, the Fake Conservatives lose 36 (and I didn't even know they could fall any further), the Lib Dems lose 4, and the Greens gain 6. Note that the only other party gaining seats is the Greens and they're only gaining a handful of seats.
Update: Reform now up 145, Labour down 98.
Labour projected to lose Wales -- where they've ruled for 27 years.
Fulton County Georgia just discovered 400 boxes of ballots for Labour
Update: REF +156, LAB -107, CON -45
Brutal: In four out of five council seats where Labour is defending, they've lost. 80%.
I'm sure it's not this simple, but Reform is straight taking Labour's and the "Conservatives'" seats. They've lost almost exactly what Reform gained. If understand this right (and warning, I probably don't), all of London's council seats are up for election, and Labour might lose hugely there, as their old voters abandon them for Reform, Muslim Indenpendents, and the Greens.
REF +190, LAB -134, CON -56.
Updates on the Labour collapse in council elections -- which wags are calling #Starmergeddon -- from Beege Welborne. There are about 5000 seats up for grabs, Labour is expected to lose 1,800, Reform will probably gain 1,580, up from... zero. So this would be more than that.
People claim that while Labour has adopted the Sharia Agenda to appeal to the million Muslims it allowed to migrate to the country, those voters are ditching Labour to vote for the Muslim Independent Party or the Greens. Delicious. This shadenfreude is going straight to my thighs.
Oh, and if Starmer loses about as badly as expected, Labour will toss him out of a window Braveheart style and replace him. He will announce he is resigning to spend more time with his Gay Ukrainian Male Prostitutes.
Media bias and senationalism are as old as, well, the media:
spidermanthreatormenace.jpg

That was written by Denny O'Neill and illustrated by, get this, Frank Miller. Editor to the Stars Jim Shooter was in charge at the time.
I always thought the gag was original to the comic book, but in fact the "Threat or Menace" headline was a satirical joke about media bias and sensationalism for a long while. The Harvard Lampoon used it in a parody of Life magazine: "Flying Saucers: Threat or Menace?"
CJN podcast 1400 copy.jpg
Podcast: Starting a new season, CBD and Sefton discuss their personal journeys to conservative principles, is Nick Shirley the beginning of a trend?, Iran trying to reignite the war, the Left attacks itself, even on "Best Guitarist" lists, and more!
Recent Comments
NaCly Dog: "Oldcat That is one point to pound in on. IST ..."

gKWVE : "#Justice4Kaya ..."

garrett: ">>It messes up the flavor and texture profile. ..."

Anna Puma: "Piper is riffing off 'being a beacon to the world' ..."

ShainS [/b][/i][/s][/u]: "[Just belatedly saw this from the prior thread:] ..."

garrett: ">>My daughter mentioned to me that she has never l ..."

Turn 2: ">>> Well traditionally it was all Judy Garland mov ..."

Harry Vandenburg: "Didn't California do the same thing with gay marri ..."

"Perfessor" Squirrel: "Organically grown, smartass. No pesticides or crap ..."

Guy Mohawk: "I think a repost of Diablo girl is warranted. ..."

Auspex: " The long march through the institutions is over, ..."

Anna Puma: "Hakeem Jeffries, every time he opens his pie-hole ..."

Bloggers in Arms
Some Humorous Asides
Archives