More validated evidence of destructive Obamanomics

[D_Bob_Crotchitch]

:smile:



And it's all supposed to be fixed in a year. We should be dancing in the streets by now with a chicken in every pot. How do you undue a decade of damage? War isn't going to work this time.

It is more than a decade. The damage began long before dumbW got into office. The foxes have been guarding the hen house. If the general public passed an amendment to the Constitution requiring the government to balance the budget, why doesn't Congress get a hint?
The Congress is not run by people who manage their own finances much less have a clue about how much money they are spending. They flat out don't give a damn as long as they can get money for their district.
In the first 100 days of FDR's first term as president, he signed into law a piece of legislation that cut the government's spending by $100 million, and cut the pay of members of Congress by 5.6%. These yahoos are such arrogant jerks they give themselves cost of living increases, and raises while the rest of the nation is hurting.
The financial policies of the Federal Reserve under Allen Greenspan printed so much funny money, it will take years for the economy to tighten back up. All the while, people are going to suffer. If foreign nations such as China decide to stop buying anymore of our debt, we are in major trouble. Interest rates on Treasury notes will sky rocket. Inflation will be out of site, and taxes will have to increase at an alarming pace.
It is time for the general public to accept its role in this mess. Nobody made you spend money you did not have to live a lifestyle you were never meant to live. Having material things doesn't make you better than somebody else. Being greedy and buying cheap imports cost over 7 million jobs. Good paying manufacturing jobs are gone. Stop going down to the biggest monoply in the nation aka walko mark, and buying cheap crap for your entertainment. Buying imported crap is not going to change you from being a piece of sh*t. Work on yourself. Get some counseling. We'd all appreciate you getting help. We are tired of putting up with your ass.
For us to recover, the government needs to establish favorable regulations, and tax rates for companies that will build their manufacturing in the USA and leave it here. A hostile business climate will only drive more manufacturing out of the country.

 

[D_Fortumus Wigglesack]

Complaining about deficits and comparing them with Bush's is an intentionally misleading argument. Obamas deficits are from economic policies; bush's are from unnecessary (and dare I sa tyrannical) wars and tax cuts that - surprise - didn't do a thing to help anyone besides the filthy rich lobbyist that actually made up his administration.

Oh, and the bailout was proposed by and done by Bush. Why is everyone forgetting this? And why is the Washington Times writer incidentally using the year 2007 instead of 2008 considering this?

 

[D_Bob_Crotchitch]

The equity bubble that burst should have deflated in the 1990s. The Federal Reserve kept it ever inflating with their loose monetary policy. Once in the 90s the market began to naturally correct. It went into freefall but the government stopped trading. If they had let it fall, the pain would have been much less.
Then, greedy people inflated real estate prices because low interest rates meant they could make payments on super expensive homes. The FR never should have approved of home equity loans. People borrowed heavily against the equity in their homes to live the high life. The bubble has popped, and people are losing their homes like mad. I read the other day it is believed that over 7 million homes could be in danger of foreclosure because people are behind on their payments. Many fools bought homes with variable interest rates. The rates have skyrocketed. People cannot refinance at a lower rate because they now owe more on the home than it's worth. The variable rates were another stupid policy of Greenspan. He was conducting his own experiments with the economy, and the result was disasterous.

 

[midlifebear]

At least Obama's administration, unlike the previous 8 years of Chimp-off-the-old-Bush, no one has broached the idea of selling off our seaports to Saudi Arabia. Although off-shore oil permits within US territorial waters (and land) are still up for grabs by anyone or any country with enough money to be the highest bidder. I guarantee, however, if the Party of No wins in 2012, you'll be able to buy McNuggets in the middle of Arches National Park, at the trail head of the Narrows up Zion's, and Canyon Lands will be littered with Starbucks and Seven/Elevens. They still haven't rescinded all of the oil/gas leases the Chimp-off-the-old-Bush was more than happy to hand out like Hallowe'en candy during his last four years. Hmmm . . . I wonder if thar's black gold under the White House lawn? Quick git me a shovel!

 

[D_Tully Tunnelrat]

I guarantee, however, if the Party of No wins in 2012, you'll be able to buy McNuggets in the middle of Arches National Park, at the trail head of the Narrows up Zion's, and Canyon Lands will be littered with Starbucks and Seven/Elevens. Hmmm . . . I wonder if thar's black gold under the White House lawn? Quick git me a shovel!

Maybe we can eat McNuggets, washed down by a Venti, while we dig up the White House lawn...

 

[deleted15807]

For us to recover, the government needs to establish favorable regulations,.......

You're joking right? Yeah kinda like the ones that got us into this mess?

 

[B_starinvestor]

Complaining about deficits and comparing them with Bush's is an intentionally misleading argument. Obamas deficits are from economic policies; bush's are from unnecessary (and dare I sa tyrannical) wars and tax cuts that - surprise - didn't do a thing to help anyone besides the filthy rich lobbyist that actually made up his administration.

Oh, and the bailout was proposed by and done by Bush. Why is everyone forgetting this? And why is the Washington Times writer incidentally using the year 2007 instead of 2008 considering this?

Um, Obama's deficit for the first fiscal month was 12X Bush's average month in '07.

Oh - and have you taken a look at who makes up Obama's administration?:wink:

Open your eyes.

 

[B_starinvestor]

The Washington Times is a right wing Moonie Paper run by Rev. Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church.

Good source material...

Knucklehead: I cited the Treasury Dept twice in this thread.

Is there a better source than the Treasury Dept?

 

[B_VinylBoy]

You're welcome, star.

 

[deleted15807]

Oh, and the bailout was proposed by and done by Bush. Why is everyone forgetting this? And why is the Washington Times writer incidentally using the year 2007 instead of 2008 considering this?

Because they know America and star have an attention span of say 1 or 2 months.

There isn't a country involved in this financial debacle given to us courtesy of Alan Greenspan and unbridled 'regulatory relief' that didn't rescue the banks and didn't resort to deficit spending. And yes at least this deficit spending had a good cause behind it rather than the vanity war in Iraq which star conveniently says 'opps sorry' and the tax cuts and spending increases that occurred under the Reign of Error known as the Bush Administration.

The cost of mopping up after the world financial crisis has come to $11.9 trillion (£7.12 trillion) − enough to finance a £1,779 handout for every man, woman and child on the planet.

-------------------------

The countries that make up the G20 grouping will face a combined budget deficit of 10.2pc of GDP in 2009 − the biggest since the Second World War. Although the biggest will be faced by the US, with 13.5pc of GDP, Britain also faces an 11.6pc deficit and Japan a 10.3pc one.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...uts-total-cost-of-crisis-at-7.1-trillion.html

​

So while we they dance around blaming Obama for the deficit the real problem is the failed core values of 'greed is good and greed works', 'the free market is the cure for everything'. The same government conservatives bash actually saved their asses and yet the ideology doesn't even allow them to acknowledge that. They are so fucking disingenuous it's sickening.

 

[MovingForward]

Stop blaming Obama or the administration. How bout we put this on our own backs and ride this out.

 

[Trinity]

So while we they dance around blaming Obama for the deficit the real problem is the failed core values of 'greed is good and greed works', 'the free market is the cure for everything'. The same government conservatives bash actually saved their asses and yet the ideology doesn't even allow them to acknowledge that. They are so fucking disingenuous it's sickening.

Nobody is blaming Obama for the deficit created prior to his administration. Obama campaigned that he was the candidate to fix the problems. Lately he's been saying that he either can't fix the problem, didn't understand the problem or his answer for the problem is better than what the American people want. Obama is being blamed for what Obama has failed to do in his first year that he was put in the White House to do.

He passed a stimulus that has been pretty much wasted and stimulated little to nothing. Obama said unemployment wouldn't go over 8%...it did. Obama said that he was going to close gitmo...nope. Obama said that he was going to end the war...Iraq and Afghanistan...Pakistan are quagmires. Obama had the answer for the housing crisis...nope. Obama was for transparency...nuh uh. Obama was able to bring people together and work across party lines...nope. Obama was against deficit spending...deficit spending is his middle name. Obama was going to end earmarks...nope. Obama was going to change the way Washington worked...backroom sweetheart deals are now attached to his administration. Taxes and cuts in medicare - issues he campaigned on but that have fallen to the wayside.

Obama is being evaluated on his own performance or the lack there of. The most concerning part is that Obama seems tone deaf and disconnected from the people so much so that he actually thinks he can campaign to persuade people to go along with his spin "I didn't communicate my policies well enough." Plouffe can't stop the Tea Party. If Obama and the Dems don't get right they will be out.

The Democrats and Obama communicated their policies and the people don't support them.

 

[midlifebear]

For those of us with patience and who never expected Obama to cure leprosy, herpes, completely eliminate the deficit, end world hunger, and walk on water his first year in office, you may find some intelligence in the following observations by Tony Kushner. He's a playwright and like many of "my people" (gay men and women) has lived through the last 50+ years in 'Mericuh -- unlike the majority of young'ns who whine and opine that Obama is destroying the land o' da free (the Supreme Court seems to be doing that all by itself). More specifically, you Reagan babies.

Anyway, I thought I would post this link for those of us who have an attention span longer than a Budwieser ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ty9CloMJn4Y

What Kushner says about Obama and gay rights also applies to responsibilities of being the President in these onerous times.

 

[DadsAreUs]

This piece demonstrates the startling numbers that Obama has amassed in his first year - nearly every one of which is record-setting in its scope - both in absolute numbers and in percentages of GDP.

EDITORIAL: Obama is killing the economy - Washington Times

This one is for all the Bush Era war-spending freaks such as Sargon, Sinwin et al:

The deficit for the first month of fiscal year 2010 was $176 billion, which was greater than the $161 billion deficit for the entire 2007 fiscal year.

What does that mean you say? That means that Obama ran up more debt/deficit in one month than Bush did for an ENTIRE year in which we were involved in two wars.

This demonstrates and validates nothing other than that the Washington Times is true to it's mission of being an ultra-right wing newspaper covering national affairs in the nations's capital. You're a smart guy but you are a bit indiscriminate about the veracity of your news sources. In this case, you are reporting on an editorial from a newspaper founded by a shady cult leader with the intent purpose of introducing a far right broadsheet to inject far-right opinion into the national discourse.

I can, by the way, quote from economists who say that the real deficit in 2007 was in fact 4 trillion dollars. Here, check it out: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=45430

 

[midlifebear]

Maybe Star should start reading The Deseret News online. Even mormons don't make everything up out of whole cloth and pull it out of their ass. They just rearrange sentences and paragraphs to bend the truth.

 

[DadsAreUs]

Maybe Star should start reading The Deseret News online. Even mormons don't make everything up out of whole cloth and pull it out of their ass. They just rearrange sentences and paragraphs to bend the truth.

I suppose that might be a step in the right direction but I was thinking of something reputable and non-partisan to get past FNC, Drudge, and Red State. Or maybe a dose of Rachel Maddow might offer some perspective, or even Morning Joe where one can here opposing view points given respect occasionally.

 

[B_starinvestor]

I can, by the way, quote from economists who say that the real deficit in 2007 was in fact 4 trillion dollars. Here, check it out: Real budget deficit: $4 trillion

What they are doing with this calculation - is looking at the present value of future liabilities associated with Social Security (the same way they calculate present value of future liabilities in pension plans.) I would actually agree with that figure.

However, the U.S. has never used this method of accounting in determining our deficit, so it would be unfair and absurd to introduce this just for the Bush term.

But it does give a more accurate picture of our dire financial situation.

 

[B_starinvestor]

I suppose that might be a step in the right direction but I was thinking of something reputable and non-partisan to get past FNC, Drudge, and Red State. Or maybe a dose of Rachel Maddow might offer some perspective, or even Morning Joe where one can here opposing view points given respect occasionally.

Grasso - Rachel Maddow is not non-partisan. Geez.

 

[B_starinvestor]

Maybe Star should start reading The Deseret News online. Even mormons don't make everything up out of whole cloth and pull it out of their ass. They just rearrange sentences and paragraphs to bend the truth.

You've been boozing with the Indians out on the reservation again, haven't you MLC?

Just remember to hydrate. Booze, then water, booze, water, booze.....you get the picture. Anyway, hope that hangover isn't too bad tomorrow morn

 

[DadsAreUs]

Grasso - Rachel Maddow is not non-partisan. Geez.

Tha's why I used the word "or." I meant it is another option to looking at non-partisan, non-ditto head media. Rachel is smart, detailed and respectfully engages her ideological adversaries with facts and well-reasoned arguments. She doesn't shut people up. She doesn't talk down to them or work to embarrass her guests.