Originally Posted By dshyates “The CBS/New York Times survey finds that 64 percent of voters believe that Obama’s policies have contributed significantly or somewhat to the persistent weakness in the economy.” I will take a weak but growing economy over what the last 2 GOP administrations did, which was plunge us into a recession...twice.
Originally Posted By dshyates “The CBS/New York Times survey finds that 64 percent of voters believe that Obama’s policies have contributed significantly or somewhat to the persistent weakness in the economy.” I will take a weak but growing economy over what the last 2 GOP administrations did, which is plunge us into a recession....twice. And their most recent recession took us to the brink. I am surprised anyone would really want to go there again. But whatever.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 I took an economics class in 1992, and the main thing I remember is that the economy is a curve, it really doesn't matter who is President, it will always go up and down. Now there are some instances where the curve can be jacked up due to policies, but it's a natural evolution for our economy to suffer prosperity followed by a recession. I will say the current and past administration's stimulus did not work and caused the economy to be FUBARed.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder While some people would offer that if not for the stimulus the country REALLY would have been fubared. <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/did-the-stimulus-work-a-review-of-the-nine-best-studies-on-the-subject/2011/08/16/gIQAThbibJ_blog.html" target="_blank">http://www.washingtonpost.com/...log.html</a>
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 While some people would offer that if not for the stimulus the country REALLY would have been fubared.<< Or it would have gradually fixed itself, which IMO is what would have happened had we left it alone. They said the same thing about the corporate bailouts, how our country would have been hurt had those companies gone under, but IMO the U.S. Government should not be bailing out private companies period...Waste of taxpayer dollars...
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Can you point to one of those studies to support your thesis?
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 Unfortunately any article against the stimulus is filled with right wing BS. I know I read something a few years ago, I'll see what I can dig up.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< Unfortunately any article against the stimulus is filled with right wing BS. >>> That should tell you something.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 <<< Unfortunately any article against the stimulus is filled with right wing BS. >>> That should tell you something.<< And if I look up anything about George W Bush I get left wing BS links.. It tells me America is becoming more nd more divided and quite a few Americans are idiots, towing party lines for absolutely no reason... Biggest problem in America is that a majority of Americans blindly follow their "team" instead of thinking for themselves.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones "I will take a weak but growing economy over what the last 2 GOP administrations did, which is plunge us into a recession....twice." I'm calling it the Bush/Obama economy.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones By the way, don't tell me about GOP nonsense expecting me to defend it. I won't. You're not getting out of facing the horrible failure of Obama's presidency by telling me what the other guys did.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones "I took an economics class in 1992, and the main thing I remember is that the economy is a curve, it really doesn't matter who is President, it will always go up and down" The whole thing about Keynesian economics, and this is the simplified version, is that you can increase government spending to level out the curve in bad times. The problem is that you're supposed to save in good times to flatten the curve in good times, and cool down the economy. But we don't have the discipline to do that.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 To an extent William is right - the economy does have natural ups and downs. However, policy does matter too, for the positive and the negative. The stimulus was unquestionably necessary to stop the bleeding. Economists like Paul Krugman argue convincingly that more stimulus was needed, but of course was blocked. And the deregulation beloved by Republicans (and signed on to by some Democrats too) without a doubt led to the collapse we're still suffering from. Simply repealing Glass-Steagall and allowing commercial banks to indulge in risky investments was a huge part of it. There's a REASON that Glass-Steagall was imposed after the depression - investment banks exist for those who WANT to invest and are okay with taking that risk; commercial banks really shouldn't be taking those kinds of risks with YOUR money, guaranteed by the FDIC, and requiring bailouts if they flop, aka "too big to fail" - and those regulations prevented another Depression for 70 years until they were so unwisely done away with. Policy does matter too.
Originally Posted By dshyates "You're not getting out of facing the horrible failure of Obama's presidency by telling me what the other guys did." The idiot noise machine blathers incessantly about "Obama's failed presidency". Please explain exactly how this has been a disastrous presidency. The republican's drove this country like drunken frat boys and left it a flaming heap is someone's yard. Obama has put out the fire, pulled out most of the dents, and gotten us back on the road. And the republicans scream that Obama has failed because the still has a few dents and and we're not back up to highway speed yet.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Exactly. Did FDR pull us out of the Depression by 1936? Nope. We were still deep in it. And Obama was handed the worst economy since then. But people understood that FDR didn't cause the mess and was trying to fix it, and he was re-elected handily. It's harder today, of course. FDR didn't have an entire industry devoted to bringing him down. There wasn't the constant drumbeat on how horrible he was coming from the internet, TV, and even radio wouldn't have dreamed of 24/7 trashing of the president in those days. There were critics, obviously, on radio and in print. But nothing like the relentless drumbeat of today, pounding itself into people's heads until it takes on the ring of "truth."
Originally Posted By dshyates One big difference between the critics then and now though, is that then the critics weren't making up stuff and getting irate about what they just made up. The modern noise machine passed "left field", without collecting $200, and are now out in the parking holding their own game.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 <<the horrible failure of Obama's presidency>> Horrible failure? Where have you been the past few years? What horrible failure? Not only has he started us on the road to economic recovery, he also got us out of Iraq, is winding down the war in Afghanistan, helped get passed a Health Care law that while it isn't perfect, is a start, and helped put an end to discriminatory policies like Don't Ask, Don't Tell. While his 1st term may not have been perfect, it definitely wasn't a "failure" by any means.
Originally Posted By dshyates For the Republicans, Obama has been a disaster. He saved the Auto industry saving miilions of Union jobs. MAN does that piss off the Republicans. Passed a healthcare bill limiting insurance co.'s profits. Man does that piss of the Republicans. Drawing down the Bush Wars. Man does that piss off the military industrial complex AKA the Republicans. Repealed DADT and now supports gay marriage. And the Republicans scream we're all going to hell in a hand basket. So what the Republicans claim is a disastrous presidency, what they mean is it has been disastrous for their backassward goals for America.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones "The republican's drove this country like drunken frat boys and left it a flaming heap is someone's yard. Obama has put out the fire, pulled out most of the dents, and gotten us back on the road." Year 1, I absolutely agree. Year 2, still giving the benefit of the doubt. Year 3, getting antsy. Year 4, complete failure. Now the Bush/Obama economy. Don't worry, it might even be the Bush/Obama/Romney economy. This idea that Obama is some well-meaning progressive is completely false and is a product of his rhetoric, not his actions. <a href="http://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2012" target="_blank">http://www.politicalcompass.or...tion2012</a> "While 2008 presidential candidate Obama appeared to champion universal health care, his first choice for Secretary of Health was a man who had spent years lobbying on behalf of the pharmaceutical industry against that very concept. Hey! You don't promise a successful pub, and then appoint the Salvation Army to run it. This time around, the honey-tongued President makes populist references to economic justice, while simultaneously appointing as his new Chief of Staff a former Citigroup executive concerned with hedge funds that bet on the housing market to collapse. Obama poses something of a challenge to The Political Compass, because he's a man of so few fixed principles." He's not who you think he is.
