Help Democrats - Slow Your Spending to Keep the Recession Going

As I was reading the headlines, I was thinking maybe we should boycott the current administration and spend only what is absolutely necessary between now and November so we can help keep this Republican Recession going.

I am personally pledging to cut back on my spending as much as possible until the elections.  I have spoken to my like minded family and friends.  Anyway, it is prudent to save right now and not spend because of the uncertainty in the economy.

http://www.nytimes.com/...

If we all work on this together we can virtually gaurantee a huge Democratic win in November.  Say it often and say it loud "Republican Recession"!!!

Even though my personal economic situation is good, I do not want to help this administration one little bit!  We need to put a good dose of reality in the Bush Administration so that they really believe we have a recession.

So delay the following:

Any major purchases:  Cars, boats, planes, big screen TVs, Major Appliances
Any domestic vacations:  If you need to go on vacation, do it on the cheap, go local, nothing extravagent
Luxury items:  Jewerly, Collectibles
Dining:  Limit going out to dinner to 1/2 of what you are currently doing
Repairs & Maintenance:  Perform minimal to keep your life running, postpone major upgrades and repairs for 10 months
House upgrade/purchase:  Well this is a no brainer in this housing market

•  My spending will be limited...

  whether I like it or not.
  Thanks to shrub's thriving economy.

  by manwithnoname on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 05:49:25 AM PDT

  •  One of Ron Paul's rare lucid moments last night..

    ...was when he talked about artificially low interest rates fueling the recession.

    The country can't use more debt to "spend" its way out of the hole it's in - the debt just makes the hole deeper. We are so fucked economically...and I fear that none of the politicians will get us out of this before we repeat 1929.

    by Sharon Jumper on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:06:14 AM PDT

    •  RP

      ...he then argued that we must steal gold from the machine elves at the earth's core to set our economy on a solid footing again.

      by Ray Radlein on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:19:39 AM PDT

    •  Watch the markets today.

      With Merrill Lynch's reported $15B write down and the sale of Countrywide to BA, coupled with this week's reported weak Christmas sales, a further and significant stock market correction may be in store.

      by brjzn on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:24:27 AM PDT

      •  BofA was just trying to save the 2 billion they

        already loaned to CW and not make the Bank of America CEO look like an idiot for doing it.
        So, now they are all in for 4 Billion. And 4 Billion of what, BTW?

        Of course, the CountryWide CEO will bail out with his golden chute.

        by Mr SeeMore on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:47:46 AM PDT

•  Dumbest.Diary.Ever.

  Did you just loofah your head to come up with something for Bill Felafel to use?

  by Downpuppy on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 05:53:56 AM PDT

  •  Thanks for the words of encouragement...

    by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 05:55:25 AM PDT

    •  I heartily encourage you

      to delete this diary.

      Or at least make it funny.

      by Downpuppy on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 05:58:58 AM PDT

      •  A snark tag might save your reputation!

        by SpamNunn on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 05:59:40 AM PDT

        •  I like controversy...it is fun

          by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:26:55 AM PDT

          •  You Honestly Think a Recession Will Hurt

            Republicans more than Democrats?  

            Even if we accept your premise that a recession makes it harder for Republicans to get elected (which may or may not be true), the people who really get hurt are people who work for a living, earn their paychecks, and live hand-to-mouth.

            by karateexplosions on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:33:44 AM PDT

            •  Then when the economy recovers in 2009...

              The Democrats will look like heroes and we will get another 8 years of Democratic led prosperity and larger majorities to govern with.

              Short term pain - long term gain!

              by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:38:35 AM PDT

              •  I Can't Tell If You Truly Believe This

                But if you do, you're an asshole.

                Short term pain, long term gain?  Are you fucking kidding me with this?  We destroy the economy, put people out of work.  I know so many people who are just holding on by a thread as it is.  They lose their jobs, and that means that they will likely lose the ability to pay for food, medicine, their homes.

                This recession is already bad enough without trying to compound the problem for hardworking Americans.

                by karateexplosions on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:43:44 AM PDT

                •  In all seriousness...

                  The issue here is that I do not trust the stewardship of the economy by the current Republican administration so I am not going to spend money on non-essential items until I feel confident of a competent administration.

                  I am not going to spend money just to keep people in work.  That is not my job to keep the economy going that the Republicans are responsible by their idiot policies destroying.

                  I believe that others should also be very careful about their spending until the election so we can see if we get a better administration.

                  In terms of doing it to intentionally hurt people no that is not what my purpose is.  If in the process of making personal decisions about my spending, it happens to help Democrats get elected...all the better.

                  by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:49:22 AM PDT

                  •  it's not what u said. yr reasoning still cockamie

                    by Orpheus on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:59:12 AM PDT

                    •  Thanks

                      by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 07:00:45 AM PDT

                  •  Your Reasoning Has Changed

                    You claimed in the diary that your goal was to instigate a recession, or to deepen an existing recession, in order to hurt Republicans electorally.  

                    Now you're saying that people should just be frugal because the economy is uncertain.  

                    Why backtrack like that?  Be like McCain -- have some conviction to stand for your own idiot policies no matter how wrong they are!

                    by karateexplosions on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 09:04:56 AM PDT

                    •  Not backtracking...clarifying my position

                      by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 09:48:18 AM PDT

                      •  So Is Your Position

                        (1) People should stop spending money because there might be a recession and they should be prepared for it

                        OR

                        (2)  People should stop spending money in order to precipitate and/or inflame a recession for the purpose of orchestrating an electoral defeat of Republicans due to economic strife

                        I don't really see how you could claim that it's both, nor do I see how #1 could possibly be "clarification" of #2.

                        by karateexplosions on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 09:59:29 AM PDT

                        •  People should stop spending...

                          unnecessary money to support this administration's goals and objectives.  The answer to your question is not either/or but both reasons.

                          There already is a recession right now so we should be cautious and we should not help bail out the Rethugs out of the recession by spending unnecessary funds on big ticket items.

                          So your answer is yes, they are both correct.

                          by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 01:44:33 PM PDT

                          •  I Gave You The Benefit of the Doubt

                            I humored you with the faint hope that you were somehow trying to be funny or satirical.  

                            The fact that you truly believe this way repulses me.    I hope the recession hits you much harder than it hits anyone I know.

                            by karateexplosions on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 02:25:31 PM PDT

                            •  Thanks for your support...

                              by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 03:16:54 PM PDT

  •  Unintended consequences.

    Well, you may be correct, however, if America continues to spend its equity, i.e., proceeds of home refinancings, on vacations and/or other temporal assets, etc., instead of investing in long term assets, an America that saves more of its heard earned income may over the long term be in everyone's best interest. If I recall correctly, sometime last year, America's savings rate actually went negative. IMO if less spending = less American debt, then America is better off, at least for the foreseeable future.  

    by brjzn on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:32:06 AM PDT

•  Let's trash the economy and put people out

  of work to help our cause?  Not me, thank you.  Very poor reasoning.  

  P.S. - I was expecting a very high (troll) UID when I read this diary.   What were you thinking?  

  by SpamNunn on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 05:57:50 AM PDT

•  Hurting the country for political gain is what

  they do.

  We should all lower our consumption to save the planet.

  We can win without consciously acting to harm our country or our people.  That is what repugs do.

  by buffalo soldier on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:00:28 AM PDT

  •  Perzactly

    I advocate the "slow your spending because you have no fucking money and gas costs $3 a gallon and health care is through the roof" approach. But to screw the economy? Other people's suffering should never be some piece on a great big board game.

    by Ray Radlein on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:18:08 AM PDT

•  You are onto something

  One of the most subversive things anyone can do in this country is refuse to consume.  Stop buying the endless stream of crap that is pushed on us every day from every media, and watch the greedheads howl.

  by Scottsdale Jack on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:04:12 AM PDT

•  I'm already a cheapskate

  So my spending will remain about the same

  by exlrrp on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:04:36 AM PDT

•  Yeah...

  This already occurred to a lot of us back in January of 2001, not necessarily to promote a recession, but simply as a means to not reward corporate interests for their efforts in installing Bushco. At this point, with the economy trucking along as "swell" (note Bushspeak - actually signifies the opposite of the word's conventional meaning) as it is, I doubt anyone will notice if things get even worse.

  I am delaying the purchase of an HD television until we get a Dem in the White House in 2009. I'm surprised I haven't seen any diaries on the craven scam by the FCC to prop up the economy and reward GE by regulating us all into purchasing new televisions next year.

  by FutureNow on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:09:52 AM PDT

  •  Get a free D to A converter coupon & you won't

    need a new TV.

    The free Digital to Analog is Hereand Here

    The actual website is HERE.

    by Mr SeeMore on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 07:01:08 AM PDT

    •  Also, numbers you can call for Free Coupon...

      How do I request a coupon?
      Between January 1, 2008 and March 31, 2009, you can request a coupon while supplies last in one of four ways:

         * Apply online
         * Call the Coupon Program 24-hour hotline 1-888-DTV-2009 (1-888-388-2009), TTY 1-877-530-2634
         * Mail a coupon application to: PO BOX 2000, Portland, OR 97208-2000. Download a Coupon Application here.
         * Fax a coupon application to 1-877-DTV-4ME2 (1-877-388-4632)

      by Mr SeeMore on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 07:05:34 AM PDT

  •  GE?

    GE does not make TVs. They sold the brand name rights to foreigners years ago. And be sure they are all made in China, whoever owns the brand. There hasn't been an American TV manufacturing plant since before I got early onset Alzies and started to forget stuff like that. But years and years.

    by Woody on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 07:01:43 AM PDT

  •  You don't need to buy a new TV

    But you will need, at minimum, a converter box (cost $50-$80) to convert the signal to your old analog set.

    Oh, btw, get 'em while they're hot because supplies will be limited. AND to produce more will literally take an act of Congress. Also be prepared to provide the gummint with all kinds of info on yourself.

    Much as I hate to say this though, this isn't necessarily a new scam. Switching to digital signals has actually been in the works for about twenty years or more. Here's the timeline of its developement

    That being said, like you, I've been amazed that no one seems to be screaming about it. That may be because it's still not common knowledge among non-netizens. I was told the other day, by a reporter doing a story on it, that this hush hush has been deliberate. They wanted to keep it quiet until a year before its arrival. Gee, wonder why?

    Perhaps the most laughable part of this was the advertised "reason" for the necessity. The air space was needed for (cue war horns) NATIONAL SECURITY!!!!

    Only I just learned that the FCC plans to auction off the unused air space as soon as the transition is complete.

    At any rate I don't know that I'll even buy the box as I stopped watching TV years ago.

    by Pariah Dog on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 07:34:54 AM PDT

•  Dear Bill O'Reilly

  if you use this, you're an idiot. But then, you already knew that.

  Delete this idiocy.

  by Buffalo Girl on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:14:23 AM PDT

  •  That is low...calling me Bill O'Reilly

    Why don't you just call me Rush or a Dittohead while you are at it...

    by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 08:15:55 AM PDT

    •  I didn't call you Bill O"Reilly

      I was writing to Bill OReilly as he read this diary to use on the air.

      But this is a crap diary and I wonder about your motives. Think about what you're saying here.

      by Buffalo Girl on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 08:28:54 AM PDT

      •  Oh I get it now...

        My motives are simple.  I do not want to support the Rethug economy and I do not feel comfortable spending discretionary funds under the current stewardship of this economy.

        When a Democrat is elected to the Whitehouse I will feel a whole lot more positive about freely spending my discretionary income.

        I also try not to spend money in "Red" states to the extent possible (e.g. buying Maple Syrup from VT intstead of NH).

        And of course try to "Buy from Blue Companies" whenever possible as well.  Every dollar of profits I give to Red States and Companies comes back as potential support for the Rethugs...

        by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 09:47:18 AM PDT

•  Howver, we don't want to increase the

  savings rate and help interest rates.  So, cash your paychecks and bury the money in your yard.  Make a good map and tell somebody in case (God forbid!) something happens to you.

  by bugscuffle on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:15:25 AM PDT

•  what a hideous idea

  1. to cause harm so that you can win?  Is that a win you would be proud of?

  2. I don't compete to make the other guy lose, I compete to be the best I can be.

  by Orpheus on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:17:08 AM PDT

  •  After November...I would go back to spending...

    like a drunken sailor and magically revive the economy.

    by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:21:52 AM PDT

•  Ugly

  This diary is truly ugly.

  This is the complete opposite of uniting Americans behing a common purpose.  This is undermining American to "win."

  by JCross on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:22:02 AM PDT

  •  I like telling companies...

    Hey I am happy to buy from you when we vote these idiots out of office.  I am not comfortable spending money right now because I do not trust their stewardship of the economy.

    by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:25:13 AM PDT

  •  I want to unite everyone after November...

    Not before

    by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:42:51 AM PDT

•  Please! Throw me out of work!

  My livelihood depends on the general health of the retail industry.  Man, wouldn't it be just awesome if we could all manufacture a recession that would cause me to lose my job?  Hardy Har Har!  Our enemies will never know what hit them!

  This is the most absurd, mean spirited diary ever.

  by Bailey on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:29:44 AM PDT

  •  Nothing turns a Republican into a Democrat...

    faster than being thrown out of work!  Of course I hope that you do not personally lose your job in the process.

    by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:35:36 AM PDT

•  Why stop with recession? We want a depression.

  Let's bring on the depression now. We can use the misery of others to enhance our electoral advantage.

  Now that's a platform we can all support.

  by science first on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:33:39 AM PDT

  •  Well we should all feel so secure...

    about our short term economic future that there should be no restraint on our spending...I guess that makes sense?

    by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:36:52 AM PDT

  •  Why Stop With Depression?

    We can settle for nothing less that the complete, utter, absolute, and unrecoverable annihilation of the global economy.

    The only problem is that there will always be an economy of some sort no matter what we do.  Unless we destroy the world.  That would really teach those Republicans.  

    by karateexplosions on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:38:35 AM PDT

    •  Well I definitely draw the line at...

      Destroying the world...that is a little too radical for me.  Some additional unrest in Europe and Asia maybe OK...but lets try to keep the world together for the next 10 months.

      by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:40:55 AM PDT

      •  Anybody Who Doesn't Support Destroying the World

        Is just helping the Republicans to win.

        by karateexplosions on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:45:41 AM PDT

        •  touche'

          by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:50:35 AM PDT

•  My spending is limited anyway

  My income is Social Security, so not a lot.

  However, I got so mad about corporations right about the time of the '04 elections that I have consistently refused to buy anything that isn't 100% necessary, like food (and now medical things since new health problems recently cropped up).  My car was totaled in an accident in '02 and I've not replaced it so that saves all car expenses and insurance.  I do monthly stock-up grocery shopping from a list, and don't do 'impulse' purchases.  It's kind of a shock to the system to go from impulse buying to spartan buying habits (oh, and I try only to 'buy blue' even for necessary things), but once there, it's rather nifty to know that corporations aren't going to profit much from me, if at all.

  by NonnyO on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:45:21 AM PDT

•  A real WTF moment.

  I am glad some of you have discretionary funds to make such choices with.

  I had to stop buying asthma inhalers when they removed the generic from the market and raised the price for the brand name 300%.

  That will show them.

  by NCrefugee on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:46:33 AM PDT

  •  I am truly sorry for your situation

    and I hope the next Democratic administration can help.  Meanwhile under the Rethugs you are screwed.

    by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:57:33 AM PDT

•  Worst. Idea. Ever.

  by maddogg on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:50:59 AM PDT

  •  Thanks for your words of...

    encouragement

    by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 06:58:02 AM PDT

•  Inevitable

  A recession is inevitable -- they always come along. Always. In fact, compared to the averages, about 57 months or almost five years IIRC, we are way overdue for one already. So this discussion is about timing, sooner or later, under Bush or under your candidate, and about who gets the blame and pays the political price.

  by Woody on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 07:05:10 AM PDT

  •  Right!

    by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 07:06:07 AM PDT

•  Based on my calculation...

  and your votes above, although there are clearly strong feelings on this topic, only 1/3 of the readers of this diary disagree with me.

  by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 07:09:49 AM PDT

•  I am glad someone finally...

  voted for my spouse won't let me stop spending...

  by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 07:11:18 AM PDT

•  Thanks for all of your feedback...

  I am off to work now...will check in later

  by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 07:19:06 AM PDT

  •  What say we just stop buying from your firm.

    Then you can live the dream.

    by valion on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 07:53:06 AM PDT

    •  Sure but I doubt you currently...

      buy any services from my company.

      by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 08:14:19 AM PDT

      •  And there's the rub in your prescription.

        Along with 300M people individually defining "absolutely necessary", and the fact that money is fungible; unless you're going to burn the money you'd otherwise spend, it won't stop flowing -- perhaps in ways not pleasing to you.

        by valion on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 08:27:51 AM PDT

        •  It is all relative...

          If 50% of the country cut back spending by 10% then there would be an effect...altough I would concede that a real effect of this is unlikely...it makes me feel better.  Besides I can save cash for supporting Democrats directly.

          by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 09:40:41 AM PDT

          •  Well, as long as you feel better. n/t

            by valion on Sun Jan 13, 2008 at 08:53:48 PM PDT

      •  But I'm Going to Stop Spending As Much Money

        Because I want a recession so we can get rid of the Republicans.  

        In order to spend less money, I've got to start getting some essential products as cheaply as possible.  The easiest way to spend less money, in my community, is to shop at Wal-Mart.

        So for every $100 (or whatever) that I might have spent at the local pet store, the mom-and-pop diner just down the road from me, the local convenience store, the regional grocery store, the regional chain video store, the local bookstore, etc., I'll just skip some of that extra stuff and pay Wal-Mart $65 for the essentials, saving myself 35%.  

        But then the pet store cashier, the diner waitress, the convenience store clerk, the grocery store bagger, the video rental shelf stocker, and the bookstore salesperson will not get any of my money.  If enough people do the same as me, they might even lost their jobs.  

        Meanwhile, I have $35 extra in my pocket.  Which sounds great enough, except that the $65 I gave to Wal-mart ends up in Lee Scott's giant money vault, which he swims in every night like Scrooge McDuck.  And the unemployed cashier, waitress, clerk, bagger, shelf stocker, and salesperson are living on an unemployment check because they can't find work.  And so they have no money to spend.  

        Next thing you know, my friend who works for a public school is suddenly laid off because the community lost not only the taxes on my purchases, but also the sales tax and income tax revenues from the cashier, waitress, clerk, bagger, shelf stocker, and salesperson.  And then it's my turn to lose my job, and suddenly that $35 is also going into Lee Scott's giant money vault in order to provide essentials for my family.

        But I'll be sure to tell myself and all of them that it will all get magically better in November, once dvogel001 at DailyKos starts spending money again.  

        by karateexplosions on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 09:39:53 AM PDT

        •  I definitely would not advocate...

          spending less by going to Walmart (the enemy of Democrats and working people).

          Just spending less than you ordinarily would on non-necessities.  Still patronize your local merchants.

          by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 09:42:42 AM PDT

          •  No Fuck That

            If I patronize local merchants that will help the economy and possible help a Republican get elected.  Plus, who knows if that cashier, waitress, clerk, bagger, shelf stocker, or salesperson already shops at Wal-Mart... or worse, donates to Republicans?  

            I agree with you that it is better to just spend way less money (even if it's at Wal-Mart) and then just keep my money so that I can weather the coming economic crash which will keep Republicans out of office!

            by karateexplosions on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 09:51:38 AM PDT

            •  That is your opinion not mine...

              I shop at Walmart as a last resort....

              by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 01:41:00 PM PDT

              •  I Guess It's Clear That You're Not Committed

                enough to defeating Republicans.  How are you supposed to hurt hardworking Americans enough that they want to vote Democratic if you aren't even willing to shop at Walmart?

                by karateexplosions on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 02:22:56 PM PDT

                •  Because that puts money...

                  in Republican candidates pockets...Shop Blue!

                  by dvogel001 on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 03:18:06 PM PDT

•  If I cut my spending any more,

  they'd have to pay me. That would be grand. Go to the grocery store, get what I want, and get cash back.

  by emmasnacker on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 09:01:11 AM PDT