Search Details

Word: wyss (lookup in dictionary) (lookup stats)
Dates: during 2000-2009
Sort By: most recent first (reverse)


Usage:

...result is that unemployment has recently dropped most sharply among less educated people. And, says Wyss, "by creating jobs for lower-skilled people, you have changed the basic way income is distributed." From 1973 to 1993, he notes, only the top-earning 20% of the population received any gain at all in real income, but "in the past five years the bottom 20% had the highest income gains" of any group...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: TIME Board of Economists: The Good Bad News | 9/25/2000 | See Source »

...effect, importing about $400 billion in net investment this year, says Lindsey, the U.S. has become more dependent on foreign capital than at any time since 1896--or, says Wyss, since the 1860s. And if those overseas centimillionaires change their mind about the best place to invest, the U.S. would get hit with a double whammy. It would lose some of the investment that has been keeping the boom going, and the dollar's value would fall, raising the cost of imports and the many U.S. products that are assembled partly from imported components. Feldstein figures a 15% drop...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: TIME Board of Economists: The Good Bad News | 9/25/2000 | See Source »

...Gore and George W. Bush campaigns brandish on the stump suddenly shrink to a kind of marginal gloss. That was one of the first and most often made observations by TIME's Board of Economists when asked to weigh the presidential candidates' competing programs in the national balance. David Wyss, the nonpartisan chief economist of Standard & Poor, prices Bush's and Gore's tax and spending plans at around $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years. That sounds like an awful lot of money, and it is, but in fact it would amount to only about 1% of the total...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: What's The Difference? | 9/25/2000 | See Source »

...whose plan seems most likely to keep the U.S. boom bubbling should look for another basis on which to choose. TIME's board painted a rosy picture of economic prospects for the next 10 years--no matter which presidential hopeful wields the brush for the finishing touches. Says Wyss: "You've got to choose between these plans--and between these plans and nothing--on the basis of equity and social effects, not on their economic impact...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: What's The Difference? | 9/25/2000 | See Source »

Relatively apolitical members of TIME's board--Wyss and Abby Joseph Cohen, head of the investment-policy committee of Goldman Sachs--are not so sure about that. They cannot suppress a nagging memory: five years or so ago, most economists were forecasting huge federal deficits as far as the eye could see--with as much certainty as they are now predicting giant surpluses for the next decade. Could the current optimism be equally off base...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: What's The Difference? | 9/25/2000 | See Source »

Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | Next