Why hate Obama?

[Morrison]

^ To a degree, yes, I agree. Kind of reminds me of a quote by television's J.R. Ewing: "Like my daddy alway's said: if you can't get in the front door, just go around to the back."

Actually that kind of reminds me Bush, Jr. also.

[HarryPotter]

Not only am I saying that, 40% of economists say that. (heard that poll recently on NPR). I think Morrison already kinda made the point.



The success of the economy is not tied directly to the deficit. In fact having some deficit is good for the economy which is why nearly every country has one, although, I agree, ours is currently too big and in the long run has a negative impact.

I think the problem is that once we perform a Keynesian move on the economy, we don't do the things necessary to go back to a more stable economy once it gets "jump-started", like slowly raise taxes and cutting spending. Why? Because it's politically unpopular to do such things. Keynesian theory works, but the way we implement it in the long run doesn't.

Well I was listening to rush limbaugh and he had the exact same poll but his numbers were vastly different. I believe it was like 70% say that's exactly what not to do....

....... Sarcasm.


There's two lame ass sides in this country and the rest are fringe kooks. Both IMO have no real agenda other then to destroy this country.

[Zasz]

It looks like history repeats itself and I doubt tea baggers, republican or democrats have a solid answer on how to correct the problem. You would think with our country's experience with recessions, we would know how to avoid them in the future, but I guess such actions would be frowned upon by the free market and labled as "socialist".

I'm all for not letting the government control every aspect of the economy, but honestly if the government stopped trying to keep things in balance and allowed classes and corporations to roam free it would be chaos. Your success in life would not be determined by how hard you work (aka The American Dream), it would be determined by who your parents are. The wealth gaps would be unimaginable with the top 1% playing God. That's not what the founding fathers had in mind.

for the most part, i want to live life free of government intrusion, with reasonable taxes, no nannying, no handouts, and few restrictions. i want to be free to buy what i want with money i earn, and not have it taken away to spend on things i don't need or care for, or even benefit from. and most importantly, i want my friends and family and even people whom i don't give a shit about to be able to do the same.


the problem is, there are too many damn people to account for (poor, middle class, and extremely wealthy), and the one's that hold all the cards (greedy and wealthy) will continue their land grab (at the expense of the poor and middle class) if everything were truly laissez faire. the greedy need to be held accountable for; hence government intrusion and restrictions. but when the government is bought by the greedy, the whole institution goes to shit.


i would consider myself a fiscal conservative, but hell if i would ever align myself with their social views. for that, i am most definitely liberal. but many liberals are horribly misguided and ignorant as to the real costs of their seemingly 'free' demands. it seems like there is no middle ground. and in regards to the tea party.. those people are sheep. laws are effectively made by the wealthy to benefit the wealthy. the middle class would die without regulation of the businesses (read: the greedy mega-rich) that control so much of their lives; their services, products, in many cases their paychecks if you work for a large corporation.


i like obama. i see him as a middle ground, with a liberal tinge, which honestly we needed after 8 years of cowboy diplomacy. he has managed his share of crises, made his share of blunders, and doesn't play dumb. the damn congress is so polarizing i'm surprised anyone can even get up to take a shit during session without hell raining down on them from both sides, let along pass any kind of law. obama is just 'setting the tone' as someone said before.


the man's got a few more gray hairs now. everyone does. we're in a bit of a bind because of numerous factors and it's gonna take more than one presidential term to sort things out, if they ever will be.

And that, except I feel that it's just a matter of time before people figure out that living comfortably and simply without worrying about corporations raping you up the butt and still having a free market doesn't mean we have to resort to communism.

[joshh]

Not only am I saying that, 40% of economists say that. (heard that poll recently on NPR). I think Morrison already kinda made the point.

Then why isn't the economy doing well right now? Kind of blows the whole point right out of the water don't you think?

So that means 60% are saying that we shouldn't do that?

He wants to focus on those that feel debt is good and spending beyond what you can manage is even better...yet it has done nothing to fix our problems even with the billions upon billions the Government has thrown at the economy to fix it....which it failed to do.

[Morrison]

The Great Depression happened during a time of non-government intervention under Hoover. Kind of blows that whole point right out of the water don't ya think?

[mrsleeve]

^

Nice try there. Under hoover we were observing some founding principlas of this nation. We had a market down turn which is normal, cyclical, and health in free markets. Hoovers approach was to let it ride out and all will be well in 2-3 years, as it was though out the world every where but the USA ( in the states its only referred to as the Great ).

When FDR came to power the great progressive and protege of Wilson saw and seized the opportunity to advance the progressive agenda, with all those wonderful programs we know today and many more that are not so well known. In doing so it stifled growth and recovery and drug out the depression for 10 long years

Thanks to the budget balancing and spending cutting in the latter part of the 30's resulted in the economy starting to pick up on its own grow all by itself a few years latter after a small initial dip. This is happening just before we got into WWII, so naturally this has all but been forgotten and its the WWII govt spending that got us outta the depression right?? Please tell why the world didnt end and economy crash when in 1946 after the war was over and the govt was not pumping all that money into the economy anymore and it all just stopped.

Govt spending is NOT THE DAMM ANSWER

Edit: the 0 is the modern equivalent to FDR in many ways, and making all the same mistakes. But really as was the case then and is again the case now, are the they really Mistakes??? Or calculated moves to further subvert the constitution and remove our freedoms in the name of helping people that should be helping them selves and protecting us from our selves????

[herbivor]

^I've heard the same argument before. Despite your opinions of universities, both sides are often discussed in economics classes. There is no right answer. The truth is, no one knows the value of not doing something. We truly don't know what would have happened if TARP didn't go through. We don't know what would have happened if Hoover continued to run the country instead of FDR. There are so many factors that drive and effect the economy. Anyone saying they have a fool proof solution that works for every case, all the time is selling you an ideology, not a solution.

[Morrison]

In another interesting anecdote we can look at the Long Depression of 1873 to 1879.

At the time, they actually referred to it as the Great Depression, but had to be re-named after the 30's so as to differentiate the two. It was called "Long" because it actually experienced a longer contractionary period at 65 months vs. the "Great" at 43 months. In 1874, Congress tried to pass the Inflation Bill which would have pumped money into the system. It was vetoed by President Grant and later by President Hayes. In 1878, the Congress was finally able to override the vetoes and recovery began in 1879.

I'm personally just glad that we haven't done anything silly enough cause a re-naming of The Great Depression into the Mediocre Depression.

[mrsleeve]

Keep voting for Obama and similar (most of them regardless of party are similar) and you will have your wishes granted.

Herbie: Keynesian economics leads to no where but debt and poverty, we are rapidly approaching that bomb we have been largely insulated against for the past 50 years thanks to being the reserve currency of the world. Govt is nothing more than a parasite, a necessary one I admit, but like the flora in your guts, too much or to little of it can lead to a very unbalanced system and thats not good. You have to have just the right amount of both govt and gut flora, or the shit that comes out as a result is disgusting, painful, unperdictable and not conducive to stable life style.

[NKRoberts]

Not only am I saying that, 40% of economists say that. (heard that poll recently on NPR). I think Morrison already kinda made the point.

You still never answered me. What did the other 60% say?

[Morrison]

Without looking at the poll I would imagine there are 4 categories.

1. Cut tax and cut spending
2. Cut tax and increase spending
3. Increase tax and cut spending
4. Increase tax and increase spending

Fiscal policy isn't necessarily a "one or the other" choice.

[mrsleeve]

You forget leave taxation and all forms of "revenue generation" alone and cut fucking spending.

You leave some sense of predictability and stabilty that the govt is not going to come after you for making a buck or try and stop you from doing so with ever increasing and over bearing regulations. You will see people start to invest and start businesses, that will increase revenue in a few years at current rates because more people will be working and more consumer activity to tax.

We have been talking about getting a franchise of some kind and starting a business, or even just starting one out right. But not in this climate you have to be a fool make those investments, and there for have not researched or gotten serious about the risk is just too great. So we will just keep saving money and decide what to do with it when things improve or at least look like they will.

[herbivor]

You still never answered me. What did the other 60% say?

I wasn't trying to avoid your question. They didn't say. I'll keep looking for the poll they sited that from.

You have to have just the right amount of both govt and gut flora, or the shit that comes out as a result is disgusting, painful, unperdictable and not conducive to stable life style.

You should really try going vegetarian, no gut pains or unpredictable shit;)

You forget leave taxation and all forms of "revenue generation" alone and cut fucking spending.

Out of curiosity, is there any time in American history from an economics perspective that you can point to and say, "Yeah, the government got it right.?"

[mrsleeve]

You should really try going vegetarian, no gut pains or unpredictable shit;)

Nahhh no thanks I like steak and bacon too much. I have tried the paleo thing a time or 2, but with my job while working its too hard to keep on it.

Out of curiosity, is there any time in American history from an economics perspective that you can point to and say, "Yeah, the government got it right.?"

In "the modern era" yup sure can for the most part anyway the 20's (other than the prohibition thing but thats not really a "economic policy" now is it).

[z31maniac]

Without looking at the poll I would imagine there are 4 categories.

1. Cut tax and cut spending
2. Cut tax and increase spending
3. Increase tax and cut spending
4. Increase tax and increase spending

Fiscal policy isn't necessarily a "one or the other" choice.

To balance this year's budget, the Fed's would have to take everyone making $200k+ /yr, and tax them at 100%, while still taxing the middle class at current rates.

It certainly points in one direction.