Will Obama become Bill Clinton II?

Speculator

1st Like
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Posts
375
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
53
Location
Kent, UK
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Obama isn't remotely a Keynesian. All his economic advisors are not, nor has he been doing what Keynesian economics would dictate. He taught at the University of Chicago and wanted to balance the budget during a recession, for fuck's sake.

Not really, Obama approved a stimulus package worth over $700bn in 2009, this type of gov't led demand management is deeply Keynsian. At no point since entering the Oval Office has he made a commitment to a balanced budget, you're simply telling lies. If not back your claims up with a bit of evidence.



Don't throw around terms that you don't really understand. And quoting Greenspan on basically anything in the last 20 years is a good start at indicating you don't know a lot about economics.
Greenspan was concerned that the FED might not be able to manipulate interest rates through the purchase and sale of government bonds if there were no US Treasuries to buy and sell. What you think about Greenspan as an individual is irrelevent, this is a legitimate concern from an economics point of view.

It's ok if you don't understand the argument though and prefer to levy personal attacks at Bernanke's predecessor.
 
Last edited:

maxcok

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Posts
7,153
Media
0
Likes
126
Points
83
Location
Elsewhere
Gender
Male
Greenspan was concerned that the FED might not be able to manipulate interest rates through the purchase and sale of government bonds if there were no US Treasuries to buy and sell. What you think about Greenspan as an individual is irrelevent, this is a legitimate concern from an economics point of view.

It's ok if you don't understand the argument though and prefer to levy personal attacks at Bernanke's predecessor.
Who's "levying personal attacks" at Greenspan and talking about him "as an individual"?
I believe SinWin was referring to his economic policies. Stop being dense and trying to create strawmen.

Naturally you would quote Alan "Irrational Exuberance" Greenspan, devoted "libertarian" disciple of Ayn Rand, crusader against even the most minimal, sensible financial regulation, and number 1, 2 or 3 on everybody's list of the people most responsible for the global economic meltdown.


 
Last edited:

B_Marius567

Sexy Member
Joined
May 30, 2004
Posts
1,913
Media
0
Likes
30
Points
258
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
NO Bill Clinton Did a better job life was good back then with unemployment at 4.6% obama is doing a bad job with unemployment at 9.6% and the u.s. national debt at $14 trillion.
 

midlifebear

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2007
Posts
5,789
Media
0
Likes
178
Points
133
Location
Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male
Speculator:

Again, it's WAY obvious you are completely clueless regarding the USA and how it's economy was wrangled into its current state. And your little "I've been studying this a great deal" moments regarding taxes and roads is laughable.

Yes, you live in a country with a high tax rate. And whose fault is that? I'm not a champion of socialism as the way to govern, but a national health plan that is affordable and available to everyone unquestionably catches diseases and medical problems early and therefore saves money. The majority of Canadians can attest to that. And they'll also tell you their system of health care is not perfect.

Someday you need to go to the USA and visit Nevada. Unlike most States, Nevada's Legislature meets every two years rather than every year. And also unlike most states, the tax on gasoline, diesel, and propane used to fuel vehicles is clearly separated from other taxes and used to maintain all freeways (emphasis on the free, no toll-way taxes), highways, county, and city roads as well as the back dirt roads into the wilderness. We've got the best public graveled roads in the entire USA. Ask anyone driving east to west across the State and you'll hear them exclaim the sudden lack of pot holes and poor asphalt or concrete they enjoy cruising along once they leave Ewetaw or Idaho and enter Nevada. However, currently Interstate 80 from Reno into the High Sierras needs some major rework. The Nevada side will get done. As for California's ability to repair and maintain the other side of the Sierra Nevada strip is another matter.

As for starting your own business, good for you. As for me running a "pseudo charity" I suggest you shut your fucking mouth. You haven't a clue. You've no idea -- as far as anyone can tell -- about managing (or possibly even working for) a private business. You're obviously a get rich quick type. Very typical. You'll be lucky to find a niche business that turns a comfortable annual profit. I'm afraid your eyes are bigger than your ability to perceive reality.

And as for understanding the US economy? You're just parroting the lack of insight tossed about by the mostly ignorant Republican Senators and Congressmen during the last two years. Note, I said "mostly," not all our Republican Representatives and Senators are as dumb as a load of bricks. Just the majority. You've obviously been feeding on the Republican chum that claims the opposing party is against successful business and capitalism. Democrats are just as interested in seeing businesses succeed and jobs created as anyone else.

If you ever do start a business, let us know how well it's going two years after you start it. If a twit such as yourself came to me for a recommendation for a small business loan I'd throw you out on your ass.

Business plan, please?
 
Last edited:

D_Davy_Downspout

Account Disabled
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Posts
1,136
Media
0
Likes
18
Points
183
Not really, Obama approved a stimulus package worth over $700bn in 2009, this type of gov't led demand management is deeply Keynsian.

Obama approved that because something needed to be done, but he let it get bogged down with poorly stimulative tax cuts, like a good supply-sider, for zero political gain.

He followed that up with zero further stimulus, while the original was far too small to fix the economy.

All being "Keynesian" is, is counter-cyclical spending. The original stimulus barely counts, and he's gone in the opposite direction since.

If you want someone who's deeply Keynesian, look at Krugman, who has been sharply critical of this president for years.

At no point since entering the Oval Office has he made a commitment to a balanced budget, you're simply telling lies. If not back your claims up with a bit of evidence.

Obama personally appointed a deficit commission against the wishes of congress, and stacked it with fiscal conservatives. He imposed wage freeze on federal employees. He has been talking about the need for fiscal responsibility for months.

Greenspan was concerned that the FED might not be able to manipulate interest rates through the purchase and sale of government bonds if there were no US Treasuries to buy and sell. What you think about Greenspan as an individual is irrelevent, this is a legitimate concern from an economics point of view.

No, that's a ridiculous scenario.

It's ok if you don't understand the argument though and prefer to levy personal attacks at Bernanke's predecessor.

No, I don't have to levy personal attacks against him. He's largely responsible for the 2 biggest bubbles of the last 100 years. He's a fucking Randian. He thought the financial industry would regulate itself. He's a moron.

The problem is you know just a tiny bit about economics, and are way too gullible.
 

houtx48

Cherished Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2006
Posts
6,899
Media
0
Likes
323
Points
208
Gender
Male
As much as he calls on Clinton makes one wonder what the deal is. Can't fault Obama to much so far he has pulled off things I thought I would never see, healthcare, DADT, and some failures too. It's always been said that Clinton has banged more black women than Obama.
 

Speculator

1st Like
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Posts
375
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
53
Location
Kent, UK
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
All being "Keynesian" is, is counter-cyclical spending. The original stimulus barely counts, and he's gone in the opposite direction since.

Nope, Keynsian counter-cyclical spending means saving during the good times and spending during the bad, he's following that formula to the letter. Unfortunately as a nation you've also spent during the good times, this wasn't Obama's fault of cause but he's doing his best to worsen the situation.


No, that's a ridiculous scenario.
Not according to Greenspan, and he was the FED chairman for over a decade so he might know a thing or two about the subject. Clinton inherited a country with federal debt levels of 66% of GDP and managed to reduce that to 56% by the time he left office. As we've seen recently one way the FED control rates is by purchasing Treasuries in a bid to influence the government or "risk free" rate, if there is little of that debt around the benchmark rate for the economy no longer exists. It turned out ok though, a certain George W Bush came to the rescue with his helicopter.


No, I don't have to levy personal attacks against him. He's largely responsible for the 2 biggest bubbles of the last 100 years. He's a fucking Randian. He thought the financial industry would regulate itself. He's a moron.
No he's not responsible for the bubbles, people like to blame him because they have no real understanding of how an economy works. The truth is just too horrible to contemplate because it would have profound implications for some of the nation's biggest parasites.
 
Last edited:

Speculator

1st Like
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Posts
375
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
53
Location
Kent, UK
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Speculator:

Again, it's WAY obvious you are completely clueless regarding the USA and how it's economy was wrangled into its current state. And your little "I've been studying this a great deal" moments regarding taxes and roads is laughable.

Yes, you live in a country with a high tax rate. And whose fault is that? I'm not a champion of socialism as the way to govern...

As for starting your own business, good for you. As for me running a "pseudo charity" I suggest you shut your fucking mouth. You haven't a clue. You've no idea -- as far as anyone can tell -- about managing (or possibly even working for) a private business. You're obviously a get rich quick type. Very typical. You'll be lucky to find a niche business that turns a comfortable annual profit. I'm afraid your eyes are bigger than your ability to perceive reality.

If you ever do start a business, let us know how well it's going two years after you start it. If a twit such as yourself came to me for a recommendation for a small business loan I'd throw you out on your ass.

Business plan, please?



The beauty of economics is that you don't have to be an Einstein to figure out how it works, if this was the case I'd never got a handle on it. You just need the ability to ask "why?" and keep asking it until you get an answer that is satisfactory.

It's basically the study of people manipulating the earth's resources into products that we find useful. Where's the difficulty in that? It's simple, no? You can complicate as much as you like but this is the foundation that shouldn't be fortgotten, but too often is and dumped in favour of more exotic disciplines such as Austrianism, Keysianism or Friedman based monetarism. This helps explain why we're in such a pickle, too many people talking too much shite.

As for my business plans I'm training to be a plumber, if it all turns out well hopefully I can extend upon the basic skills that I'm learning, but at the moment that's about the size of it.

The fact that you wouldn't grant me a loan based on nothing more than a personal dislike of political convictions is precisely why the socialism that you advocate is so dangerous and always leads to tyranny. Once power is centralised and an official in charge decides you're the wrong type of person -for whatever reason- your quality of life is going to suffer inexorably, capitalism disperses power and prevents nepotism from taking hold. Socialism concentrates power, and once it's given away it's very difficult to get back.
 
Last edited:

midlifebear

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2007
Posts
5,789
Media
0
Likes
178
Points
133
Location
Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male
Ooooo, a pissing match. Although I'm not into water sports, I'm happy to respond.

First, the reason I wouldn't extend you a business loan has nothing to do with your political convictions. But it has everything to do with:

1. Your existing assets -- both liquid assets and those that can be used as collateral.
2. A proven track record that you have the requisite skills to run a business, even as an itinerant plumber.
3. Your credit worthiness based upon your history of taking on small loans and paying them back.
4. And I still have yet to see if you understand the need for a business plan.
5. And then there are small issues such as:
a. Are you a licensed contractor?
b. Do you know how to negotiate a bid?
c. What examples of your work history (previous employers, clients, and pro bono work) can I review?
c. What are your community or local references?

But most of all, why should I authorize you as a business risk? Why do you deserve a loan? What do you offer (in your business plan) that other itinerant plumbers don't? What makes you special? And here's a hint: this last part has nothing to do with your political beliefs, what church you attend, if you're a christian, jew, or muslim. Think about it. What raises you above your competition that I should stick my neck out and match the seed money for your business?

I applaud your self-motivation to become a businessman. And I sincerely wish you success. If I may suggest, take some time to read The Secret Life of Money by Michael Thomas. The author imparts a sound and factual look at the spiritual, mythological, and psychological aspects of money, with worthwhile stories, that will help you on a journey that places money in service to life and not vice versa. Once you understand the peripheral fundamentals of micro economics, you'll be better prepared to survive a global economic collapse such as the one we are currently swirling around.

Second, well . . . I guess there is no second.

Bonne chance. :smile:
 
Last edited:

Speculator

1st Like
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Posts
375
Media
0
Likes
1
Points
53
Location
Kent, UK
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Ooooo, a pissing match. Although I'm not into water sports, I'm happy to respond.

First, the reason I wouldn't extend you a business loan has nothing to do with your political convictions. But it has everything to do with:

1. Your existing assets -- both liquid assets and those that can be used as collateral.
2. A proven track record that you have the requisite skills to run a business, even as an itinerant plumber.
3. Your credit worthiness based upon your history of taking on small loans and paying them back.
4. And I still have yet to see if you understand the need for a business plan.
5. And then there are small issues such as:
a. Are you a licensed contractor?
b. Do you know how to negotiate a bid?
c. What examples of your work history (previous employers, clients, and pro bono work) can I review?
c. What are your community or local references?

But most of all, why should I authorize you as a business risk? Why do you deserve a loan? What do you offer (in your business plan) that other itinerant plumbers don't? What makes you special? And here's a hint: this last part has nothing to do with your political beliefs, what church you attend, if you're a christian, jew, or muslim. Think about it. What raises you above your competition that I should stick my neck out and match the seed money for your business?


This is all very kind but I don't need your, or anybody else's money, I have my own thanks and I worked damn hard to get it. These are all good criteria for assessing credit worthiness but you seem to have made your mind up before actually knowing anything about my financial situation. Kinda jumping the gun a bit there I feel.

The banks would probably be tripping over themsleves to lend me cash seeing as I don't need any, it's only fair though. I've been lending to them all these years by keeping my savings account positive.


I applaud your self-motivation to become a businessman. And I sincerely wish you success. If I may suggest, take some time to read The Secret Life of Money by Michael Thomas. The author imparts a sound and factual look at the spiritual, mythological, and psychological aspects of money, with worthwhile stories, that will help you on a journey that places money in service to life and not vice versa. Once you understand the peripheral fundamentals of micro economics, you'll be better prepared to survive a global economic collapse such as the one we are currently swirling around.


Tbh this sounds like the sort of misinformation and economic voodooism that I feel it's important to avoid. These past 3 years of hard experience have taught me a heck of a lot, I don't mean to be disrespectful to Mr Thomas but I doubt I'll gain any additional insight by reading his work. What is it that he knows for example that the bankers and financiers in the city didn't? My guess is not a lot, but I suppose I'll never find out..
 

midlifebear

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2007
Posts
5,789
Media
0
Likes
178
Points
133
Location
Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
Sexuality
60% Gay, 40% Straight
Gender
Male
Specky poo:

I, personally, never want to lend you money. I was only responding to your assertion, "The fact that you wouldn't grant me a loan based on nothing more than a personal dislike of political convictions is precisely why the socialism that you advocate is so dangerous and always leads to tyranny." Seems you've forgotten that was your little tirade a post or two back.

It also seems you are the only one screaming about the evils of Socialism on a thread whose subject is, ostensibly, the eventual achievements of President Obama being compared to tho past achievements of President Clinton. Neither of which have anything to do with turning the USA into an exclusive socialist country.

However, you found a way to highjack the thread and change it to a debate regarding Socialism and your deluded knowledge of economics, an act on your part which most of us have recognized as an obvious sham. May I be the first to applaud your insistence upon remaining ignorant regarding things you obviously know nothing about: economics and money. You really are a flaming little twit.

Wallow in it son. You've earned it.
 

Pierced1953

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2010
Posts
642
Media
91
Likes
215
Points
78
Location
naked Tn
Sexuality
90% Straight, 10% Gay
Gender
Male
No thats being too kind. he's a whole different class of ass.

Well lets not get mean boys. lets face it,they are all asses,even the newly elected. none of them care about driving us in debt where we can't recover. it's a new breed of greed, when the middle class loses their ass, the country will be out of gas,only because we can't afford it.

Obama talked about setting an example,a vacation costed millions will set the example for gov and big business to follow to run this country into the ground. Obama was handed a mess that his ass couldn't handle, a class he didn't know, and he will end up an ass, in a rich class and it will be our ass.

Nothing like Jimmy Boy Carter who is an ass,a class ass and a forgotten ass, and cover your ass.
 

D_Davy_Downspout

Account Disabled
Joined
Dec 5, 2004
Posts
1,136
Media
0
Likes
18
Points
183
Nope, Keynsian counter-cyclical spending means saving during the good times and spending during the bad, he's following that formula to the letter. Unfortunately as a nation you've also spent during the good times, this wasn't Obama's fault of cause but he's doing his best to worsen the situation.

Actually he's not spending nearly hard enough during the bad times and also talking about austerity during the bad times. He's a poor Keynesian, and none of his advisors can be identified as such. You don't get to just claim he's a Keynesian because he spends any money at all during a recession.

Everybody in Government is a Keynesian to some extent, unless their idiots.

Not according to Greenspan, and he was the FED chairman for over a decade so he might know a thing or two about the subject. Clinton inherited a country with federal debt levels of 66% of GDP and managed to reduce that to 56% by the time he left office. As we've seen recently one way the FED control rates is by purchasing Treasuries in a bid to influence the government or "risk free" rate, if there is little of that debt around the benchmark rate for the economy no longer exists. It turned out ok though, a certain George W Bush came to the rescue with his helicopter.

Clinton was the beneficiary of a good economy and better tax rates than we have now.

Greenspan oversaw two bubbles and did nothing to stop them. He's essentially a joke in economic circles right now, and arguably the worst Fed chairman we've ever had.

No he's not responsible for the bubbles, people like to blame him because they have no real understanding of how an economy works. The truth is just too horrible to contemplate because it would have profound implications for some of the nation's biggest parasites.

He's not solely responsible, but he could have prevented some of the damage, and he's partially responsible thanks to low interest rates.