Biden: "We Misread How Bad the Economy Was..."

[epicSocialism4tw]

Ha!

Biden may prove to be the Obama administrations worst enemy. I thought he was a brain-dead choice at the time, and he is proving me right over and over and over and over...

Biden admits that the Obama administration didnt understand the economy: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31745563/ns/politics-white_house?GT1=43001

[Northman]

If its true thats pretty sad.

[Spider]

Okay I will play along ............ How so ? you think it is funny , that no one knew just how bad Bush ****ed up the economy ?
Iwouldnt be laughing to much if I were you , Bush ****ed up royally , and you was one of them down here defending him .....

[epicSocialism4tw]

Okay I will play along ............ How so ? you think it is funny , that no one knew just how bad Bush ****ed up the economy ?
Iwouldnt be laughing to much if I were you , Bush ****ed up royally , and you was one of them down here defending him .....

:rofl:

Deflect away.

This one is in Obama's lap, dude. Quit making excuses. Bush didnt make Obama's decisions.

[Spider]

:rofl:

Deflect away.

This one is in Obama's lap, dude. Quit making excuses. Bush didnt make Obama's decisions.

And you wonder why people think of you the way they do .........there is a reason why you are regarded as the Drama Lama .......
ok now for the deflection, so Bush had nothing whatsoever to do with this ?
Obama did all of this on his own ? and if you read the article all Biden is saying is , it will take longer then planned , But it will work .......... So where are you even going with this ? All this is saying is Bush ****ed up worse then we thought ........

[Florida_Bronco]

This is just another dumb cheerleading thread from one of the right wing kooks on this forum. I'm certainly no expert on the economy but I do know that it's an extremely fluid system impacted by an untold number of circumstances. It's not quite as simple as the patterns your average right winger can follow, which is about as complicated as red, green, blue, red, green...etc.

[Northman]

Ill only add that even Obama said the economy wasnt going to be fixed over night. I mean, maybe Biden himself didnt have a great idea of how bad it is but Obama didnt seem to think it was going to be fixed in 7 days.

[epicSocialism4tw]

This is just another dumb cheerleading thread from one of the right wing kooks on this forum. I'm certainly no expert on the economy but I do know that it's an extremely fluid system impacted by an untold number of circumstances. It's not quite as simple as the patterns your average right winger can follow, which is about as complicated as red, green, blue, red, green...etc.

Ha!

Ah...okay. We all see how it is now. The crooked cop has shown up to enlighten us all.

I guess its okay for the Obama administration to admit that they screwed up the biggest problem of our time.

Keep drinking the kool aid, buddy.

[Bronco Bob]

Ha!

Ah...okay. We all see how it is now. The crooked cop has shown up to enlighten us all.

I guess its okay for the Obama administration to admit that they screwed up the biggest problem of our time.

Keep drinking the kool aid, buddy.

If it's the same kool-aid you've been drinking the last eight years, no thanks.

[Florida_Bronco]

Ill only add that even Obama said the economy wasnt going to be fixed over night. I mean, maybe Biden himself didnt have a great idea of how bad it is but Obama didnt seem to think it was going to be fixed in 7 days.

Exactly.

It's simply hilarious that the rightards are getting a laugh out of this considering that the team they put up against Obama/Biden was an old geezer who publicly admitted he didn't know **** about the economy and a bimbo MILF from Alaska.

Apparently they'd be more comfortable with fools who had no clue how to handle the economy rather than extremely smart men who might make mistakes from time to time. Hey, it's all about consistency right?

[Rohirrim]

When the economy first started crashing under Bush's mal-term, I remember reading an article in the New Yorker about the derivatives market that caused the whole thing. The writer pointed out that even the heavyweights on Wall Street didn't understand it. In fact, there were only a handful of mathematicians who had been hired by banks to create the derivatives market who did understand it. No surprise that Obama and Biden don't understand. From what I've seen, very few do. I guarantee you drama llama doesn't.

[Bronco Bob]

They're still in mourning over the passing of the Bush administration.

[Rock Chalk]

Okay I will play along ............ How so ? you think it is funny , that no one knew just how bad Bush ****ed up the economy ?
Iwouldnt be laughing to much if I were you , Bush ****ed up royally , and you was one of them down here defending him .....

Spider you are a moron.

Bush didnt pass the laws that led to the real estate crisis. That **** goes back to JIMMY CARTER and then perpetuated and made worse by BILL CLINTON.

The last two democrats.

The economy burst because of real estate, plain and simple. That is the SOLE reason everything else went to ****. ANd that is the democrats fault, not BUsh Srs.

****ing stupid redneck, if you dont know what you are talking about shut the **** up.

[~Crash~]

Okay I will play along ............ How so ? you think it is funny , that no one knew just how bad Bush ****ed up the economy ?
Wouldn't be laughing to much if I were you , Bush ****ed up royally , and you was one of them down here defending him .....

So you don't think the Democrats congress and senate had nothing to do with the house prices collapse Hilarious! or gas prices that buried all of us in debt ? I hope you don't think Americans are that stupid . the D side is about to feel the drop of the hammer .

[cutthemdown]

Economy actually just getting worst because of them.

[elsid13]

The United State's economy is the largest most complex market in the world. To admit not knowing all the underling issues isn't something that funny, it honest. I would far more weary of someone that say they completely understand it.

[~Crash~]

the Demacrats are in office because of the Iraq war and now they are planing on stay in Iraq . to rich .

[~Crash~]

The United State's economy is the largest most complex market in the world. To admit not knowing all the underling issues isn't something that funny, it honest. I would far more weary of someone that say they completely understand it.

oh so you are saying I don't understand last year I was putting all my money in my tank and not toward a new TV ? I think you should shovel the Bull some were Elsid .

[cutthemdown]

The United State's economy is the largest most complex market in the world. To admit not knowing all the underling issues isn't something that funny, it honest. I would far more weary of someone that say they completely understand it.

I've said all along Presidents not smart enough, not accountants, they can't figure out the economy. CLinton had nothing to do with his being good. It was all fueled by the tech boom. He had tons of revenue streaming in, that is all.

One thing I do know though is that tons of spending can cause inflation. Every President knows that and IMO that is all we have to fear.

[cutthemdown]

the Demacrats are in office because of the Iraq war and now they are planing on stay in Iraq . to rich .

trust me when the president gets the scuttle on what happens if we totaly withdraw right now, there is no way he can do it.

The spectacle of Iraq falling into civil war, Iran going im, Turkey going, kurds fighting for independence just not worth it.

[SonOfLe-loLang]

It's laughable to blame this economy on Obama, even though Rush and most of the republicans in congress try to. Remember, DURING THE ELECTION, most said the economy would continue to spiral NO MATTER WHAT until late 09-early 2010. Even when the economy starts to rebound, more jobs will be lost.

For those who blame Clinton and Carter? Really? Sure, SOME of clinton's decisions didnt HELP (he repealed Glass steagall i think), but not putting blame on Reagan, Bush 1, and ESPECIALLY Bush 2 is absolutely ridiculous.

This is going to be a slog. And its ridiculous to say the stimulus worsened the crisis WHEN MOST OF THE STIMULUS MONEY hasn't even gone out yet. STAY THE COURSE. We learned this lesson during the new deal. The economy started to grow, we got complacent, tried to balance the budget, and it started falling again. And don't gimme that **** about the new deal delaying the recovery. It's bull**** revisionist history. Like Amity Shlaes claiming there was little to no job growth during the new deal, but conveniently leaving out government jobs.

Why don't people understand that government spending will only help the private sector. The more people who have jobs, the more money they will spend, the more the economy moves. This benefits everyone and, right now, there is little to no threat of inflation (def more of a deflationary issue). Stay the course

[cutthemdown]

You can't blame Presidents for the economy. You don't really think it is Bush's fault housing went way up then crashed do you? Unemployment not Obama's fault. But Obama made rosy predictions to pass his budget that said growth was right around corner. He is responsible for his predictions on unemployment and economy growth because he used those to get budget passed and make his projections for a balanced budget by his second term workout.

The economy will recover on its on, all Obama has to do is not spend tons of money. IMO though he is spending too much. Things like stimulus to fix a bridge a short term bandaid at best.

What they need to do is make laws that allow American compainies to compete with the world.

IMO cap and trade doesn't do that and either does higher taxes.

[SonOfLe-loLang]

You can't blame Presidents for the economy. You don't really think it is Bush's fault housing went way up then crashed do you? Unemployment not Obama's fault. But Obama made rosy predictions to pass his budget that said growth was right around corner. He is responsible for his predictions on unemployment and economy growth because he used those to get budget passed and make his projections for a balanced budget by his second term workout.

The economy will recover on its on, all Obama has to do is not spend tons of money. IMO though he is spending too much. Things like stimulus to fix a bridge a short term bandaid at best.

What they need to do is make laws that allow American compainies to compete with the world.

IMO cap and trade doesn't do that and either does higher taxes.


I dont understand why people think that if they just give companies MORE of leash, that they'll suddenly act like good little boys and be honest and true. What we need is more people working. Obviously, its not a simple fix...tons of **** needs to happen well beyond all of our comprehension.

And no, its not ALL the presidents fault, but to absolve them of all guilt is wrong as well.

[elsid13]

I've said all along Presidents not smart enough, not accountants, they can't figure out the economy. CLinton had nothing to do with his being good. It was all fueled by the tech boom. He had tons of revenue streaming in, that is all.

One thing I do know though is that tons of spending can cause inflation. Every President knows that and IMO that is all we have to fear.

At the end of the day when you reach that level of responsibility it's about having smart organized competent staff under you. The President set the agenda and vision, the staffs runs the country.

I wouldn't worry about inflation, because the fed will be strongly watching the indicators and is poised to increase rates as needed to head that off.

[spdirty]

Gonna make for a helluva campaign ad. As well as more stupid shlt Biden will say the next 3 years.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Summary: Bush left an even bigger mess than we realized.

What a non-story this is.

[Florida_Bronco]

Summary: Bush left an even bigger mess than we realized.

What a non-story this is.

Yep. They're basically say "HAHAHAHAHA! You didn't even know how bad our guy ****ed things up!"

[Spider]

So you don't think the Democrats congress and senate had nothing to do with the house prices collapse Hilarious! or gas prices that buried all of us in debt ? I hope you don't think Americans are that stupid . the D side is about to feel the drop of the hammer .
Check out Bill Clinton and Grahms roll in Glass Steagal , but what crippled us was the Enron loophole , and it just wasnt gas , California got raped to the tune of billions ......... really pay attention to what in the hell you are yapping about.....

[Spider]

Spider you are a moron.

Bush didnt pass the laws that led to the real estate crisis. That **** goes back to JIMMY CARTER and then perpetuated and made worse by BILL CLINTON.

The last two democrats.

The economy burst because of real estate, plain and simple. That is the SOLE reason everything else went to ****. ANd that is the democrats fault, not BUsh Srs.

****ing stupid redneck, if you dont know what you are talking about shut the **** up.

Bull**** , Bush eased up alot of the restrictions , including the Enron loophole , you should know by now you cant bull**** me ,....Sell it to some other poster

[Bronx33]

At what point can we safely say ( it's obamas) fault? or is this going to be a never ending excuse all i know is obama lied to get the throne and i depise liars expecially when it involves mine and my kids future. Iam truely suprised folks really don't care about the broken campaign promises/lies. I really had high hopes for obama he had a huge chance to do a good things for the USA and for the black race and all i see is the same old BS party first crap .Obama avoids answering the tough questions if you are even paying attention iam not covinced he even knows what hes doing other than grabbing power for the party it's like hes on a mission. Who the **** put a 32year old kid in charge of GM debacle that should have never been bailed out in the first place and his first move is to eliminate US jobs.

[Spider]

I dont understand why people think that if they just give companies MORE of leash, that they'll suddenly act like good little boys and be honest and true. What we need is more people working. Obviously, its not a simple fix...tons of **** needs to happen well beyond all of our comprehension.

And no, its not ALL the presidents fault, but to absolve them of all guilt is wrong as well.

Only to the bed wetters .... Bush , reagan , Bush jr , and even Clinton eased up regulations governing banks and wal street ,,, for ****s sake , these dip ****s act as if the S&L bail out never happened ...... todays education , these bastards are as stupid as the day is long

[Spider]

At what point can we safely say ( it's obamas) fault? or is this going to be a never ending excuse all i know is obama lied to get the throne and i depise liars expecially when it involves mine and my kids future. Iam truely suprised folks really don't care about the broken campaign promises/lies. I really had high hopes for obama he had a huge chance to do a good things for the USA and for the black race and all i see is the same old BS party first crap .Obama avoids answering the tough questions if you are even paying attention iam not covinced he even knows what hes doing other than grabbing power for the party it's like hes on a mission. Who the **** put a 32year old kid in charge of GM debacle that should have never been bailed out in the first place and his first move is to eliminate US jobs.

Sing it to someone else , you and several other bed wetters were down here defending out sourcing , now that it has bite us in the ass like those of us on the left pro union said it would , you monkey dicks want ot blame on everyone but the republicans .........

[Bronx33]

Sing it to someone else , you and several other bed wetters were down here defending out sourcing , now that it has bite us in the ass like those of us on the left pro union said it would , you monkey ***** want ot blame on everyone but the republicans .........

Ill sing it anywhere the **** i want and i never once defended outsourcing so quit making shyt up.

[Spider]

Ill sing it anywhere the **** i want and i never once defended outsourcing so quit making shyt up.

well one bed wetter is the same as the other ..... you all look alike to me .... perhaps it wasnt you , but you supported outsourcing by voting republican ...it is high time you took responsibility for the way you vote ........... Just Like I will if Obama makes us a true socialist country or communism country .........
But dont sit there and pretend you supported America , when you voted republican ..... when you vote republican all you support is wal street and bankers

[Atlas]

I'm very comfortable with what Obama is trying to do. The 2010 election are still a ways off. The economy with start to turn around in January/February.

[Rigs11]

8 years to **** it up and only 5 months to fix it. That's rich.I've yet to hear from the right as to what if anything they would have done to help the economy.

[cutthemdown]

8 yrs to screw it up riggs? Cmon Bushes economy was not bad for 8 yrs. All Presidents will have ups and downs over 8 yrs, unless they get lucky.

Obamas economy will get better but it will just be natural market factors that account for it.

I will judge Obama on health care, inflation, energy bill, supreme court nominees, Israel Palestinian issue etc.

I just don't think Presidents control economy as much as we think.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Obamas economy will get better but it will just be natural market factors that account for it.
What do you mean by "natural market factors"?

[cutthemdown]

What do you mean by "natural market factors"?

commerce and the private sector are what grow the economy. Markets change over time and sometimes we have slowdowns before new markets emerge and it grows again. What I am saying is there is a ebb and flow to the economy and that IMO its bigger then the president.

[footstepsfrom#27]

commerce and the private sector are what grow the economy. Markets change over time and sometimes we have slowdowns before new markets emerge and it grows again. What I am saying is there is a ebb and flow to the economy and that IMO its bigger then the president.
This is certainly far more than a slowdown or the ebb and flow...it's a wholesale collapse of confidence in the finance industry. The private sector is not the only thing that grows the economy, but in this case I think we're asking the wrong questions even when we're asking about the private sector.

Every analysis of this stimulus bill that I've read so far indicates a predicted early growth between 2009-2014 when the financial impact is highest, followed by a projected slow down as higher interest on the national debt cancels out gains made from improved infrastructure and lessened private investment in the latter two years of the package ending in 2019. What we should be asking is, "What happens AFTER 2019?" That's the real issue here...not how the economy does now, but whether what we're doing is going to create some permanency in terms of our ability to compete against the rest of the world.

People have different definitons of what "better" means when they're discussing the economy....jobs or wages, productivity and the availability of capital to generate growth...maybe just what's going to happen with the grocery bill. We have to start talking about more than the surface issues.

The unknown factor in this equation so far is the so-called multiplyer effect...the secondary economic impact resulting from initial investment like ripples on a pond when a stone is thrown in. The Obama administration's predicted it at $1.50 for each $1.00 in federal money spent and .99 per dollar in tax breaks. Others may take issue with those numbers...reguardless, the real impact of this may not be the number of jobs, the impact of inflation or the availability of capital. It might very well rest on whether we can fix a lot of the things that are keeping us from competing as well as we could right now. Some of that's infrastructure...espcially in the inner cities...some is a mixture of other factors like aging factories and lousy schools, poor public transit, the digital divide, etc...

In any case...we should be talking much more about how and where private investment needs to be following on the heels of public money and less about the poltics of this. We have an enormous waste of human resources going on that represents a double whammy...a financial drain due to the need for increased social spending and the lack of productivity we could be getting from this area of the labor markets but aren't. It's like a QB throwing a pick 6 in the red zone...a 14 point swing. Instead of just trying to stimulate growth, we should be talking about what kind of growth, why it's necessary, and how we get there.

[footstepsfrom#27]

http://news.thomasnet.com/companystory/562480

AEM urges swift action on infrastructure legislation.

Release date: June 18, 2009

The Association of Equipment Manufacturers (AEM) joins a coalition of organizations today to urge Congress to move ahead quickly on desperately needed reauthorization of surface transportation legislation.

America's infrastructure is crumbling and proper investment can help improve American quality of life, boost U.S. competitiveness and reduce our nation's high unemployment rate, AEM said today in Washington, DC.

"AEM applauds the introduction of this framework to move forward on reauthorizing the federal surface transportation programs. If Congress can make a long term commitment to investing in infrastructure, contractors will be able to make needed investment in capital equipment that will meet the short term need to put people back to work and meet the long term need to repair and update US infrastructure," noted AEM President Dennis Slater.

AEM is working on Capitol Hill directly and through industry coalitions to support innovative funding solutions to fund the federal transportation programs. The association is an active member of the Americans for Transportation Mobility (ATM) and supports its efforts to coordinate a campaign for improved infrastructure with business, labor, transportation organizations and concerned citizens.

"An efficient and safe transportation network benefits all of us, and we urge swift action by the Committee and the House to consider this vital legislation," Slater added.

AEM represents more than 800 companies globally that make equipment for the agriculture, construction, forestry, mining and utility sectors.

[That One Guy]

What I don't seem to understand and don't see discussed is how any of this can be expected to truly save America when the trade deficit is as large as it is. If the government "gives" a dollar to a citizen to stimulate the economy and .30 of it instantly goes to China or some other world market, that's bad. The government just then spent $1 for .70 of stimulus. That .70 will recirculate to another American job who may then send a bit more of it to China. Eventually, unless the trade deficit settles, all of our money is funneling out and American jobs aren't being improved.

China loans us money which goes right back into the Chinese economy. We're paying for Chinese growth and running up debt to do it. We are China's stimulus package.

Unless we find a way to beat the world, debt is the only way we can sustain our economy and we've all seen what a debt economy eventually does. Bottomless debt got us here but seems to be the only answer out. Can it work?

[gyldenlove]

Biden is a tool.

[barryr]

Fun how this works. If Bush said "he didn't understand the economy" or "didn't know how to do my taxes" would be used as evidence of him being "stupid" not of him being "honest."

[TailgateNut]

Gonna make for a helluva campaign ad. As well as more stupid shlt Biden will say the next 3 years.

Regardless of HOW MUCH STUPID **** comes out, it still wont put "the MILF" in the WH. Nothing will ever top her stupidity.:rofl:

I guess you rightards think The Geezer and the MILF would have been able to clean up Bushs' mess in a few months. :rofl:

[Rohirrim]

You can paint it any way you like but what this economy represents is what happens when the corporatocracy owns the government. Both sides. Since Teddy Roosevelt, we've operated under the premise that government is the only barrier to the ravaging greed of the corporatocracy. Well, they've bought the government and the government now is their tool. In many ways, we are exactly like Rome. When anybody wanted to run for office in Rome, they had to find patronage and their patrons then spread money around, buying votes. Once they were elected, they served the interests of their patrons first. The Roman leadership continued to mouth the platitudes of republicanism long after they had ceased being a republic.

[Florida_Bronco]

Regardless of HOW MUCH STUPID **** comes out, it still wont put "the MILF" in the WH. Nothing will ever top her stupidity.:rofl:

I guess you rightards think The Geezer and the MILF would have been able to clean up Bushs' mess in a few months. :rofl:

We're in total agreement here. :thumbsup:

[footstepsfrom#27]

What I don't seem to understand and don't see discussed is how any of this can be expected to truly save America when the trade deficit is as large as it is.
You don't see this discussed? Look at post #41 right above this comment, especially the bolded part... :sunshine:
If the government "gives" a dollar to a citizen to stimulate the economy and .30 of it instantly goes to China or some other world market, that's bad.
You need to read up a bit on this thing...seriously. Start with the first of two links I posted a few spots back on summary analysis by the non partisan federal budget group.
The government just then spent $1 for .70 of stimulus. That .70 will recirculate to another American job who may then send a bit more of it to China. Eventually, unless the trade deficit settles, all of our money is funneling out and American jobs aren't being improved.
Where are you getting your figure of .70? The administration estimate is $1.50 per $1 spent and .99 for $1 in tax relief...some will argue those figures but I've seen nobody suggest a 70 cent return on $1, and many conservative groups argue that $3 for each $1 of tax relief is more accurate.

We have a federal program running out of the US Treasury BTW that returns $27 in private equity investment for every $1 invested from public money...that's BEFORE the so called stimulus multiplyer effect...roughly a 2700% return on investment. It invests in the inner city business community. Bush tried to shut it down for reasons I'm sure only he can possibly explain...the current Congress has voted to increase it over his objection. We should be looking much harder at the CDFI program as a model for scaling out how we do community reinvestment through this stimulus plan: http://www.opportunityfinance.net/uploadedFiles/Press/Clippings/american_banker_6.13.07.pdf

[That One Guy]

You don't see this discussed? Look at post #41 right above this comment, especially the bolded part... :sunshine:

You need to read up a bit on this thing...seriously. Start with the first of two links I posted a few spots back on summary analysis by the non partisan federal budget group.

Where are you getting your figure of .70? The administration estimate is $1.50 per $1 spent and .99 for $1 in tax relief...some will argue those figures but I've seen nobody suggest a 70 cent return on $1, and many conservative groups argue that $3 for each $1 of tax relief is more accurate.

We have a federal program running out of the US Treasury BTW that returns $27 in private equity investment for every $1 invested from public money...that's BEFORE the so called stimulus multiplyer effect...roughly a 2700% return on investment. It invests in the inner city business community. Bush tried to shut it down for reasons I'm sure only he can possibly explain...the current Congress has voted to increase it over his objection. We should be looking much harder at the CDFI program as a model for scaling out how we do community reinvestment through this stimulus plan: http://www.opportunityfinance.net/uploadedFiles/Press/Clippings/american_banker_6.13.07.pdf

I definitely did not mention that I was throwing out hypothetical numbers.

If the government were only investing in infrastructure, I'd agree that it would help the future and be an investment. Instead though, they're trying to get cash into the hands of the citizens. That cash is going to China through the trade deficit. My example was that since more money is going out than coming back in, the stimulus that the federal government is trying to force into the economy is just flowing out to China.

It's simple, the trade deficit shows we are not competitive in the global market.

[Bob]

Okay I will play along ............ How so ? you think it is funny , that no one knew just how bad Bush ****ed up the economy ?
Iwouldnt be laughing to much if I were you , Bush ****ed up royally , and you was one of them down here defending him .....

Bush did, now Obama and the gang continue the same general policies, but at a faster pace ....

[footstepsfrom#27]

It's simple, the trade deficit shows we are not competitive in the global market.
That's the single biggest point I've been making in here on any topic related to the economy. And while I agree that we should be doing more in terms of modernizing the infrastructure, you also have to prime this pump with something. If you look at the outlays for infrastructure in this bill, they mostly start to hit in the last 5 year of the spending...that's because it takes time to research, design, test, and put major construction projects...especially those we recognize rely on technological advancements...on the table. Meanwhile we have to do something to ensure that the downward spiral of consumer confidence doesn't simply go into a straight dive. We're not going to "fix" the China problem in four years, or even in eight years...and it's not only China BTW...we're behind the 8 ball all over the world in some industries we used to compete in. We need a radical shift in other things besides infrastructure...starting with both health care and education. People (human resources) are wasted when they have no real incentive to participate in the economy. Fixing the infrasturcture alone will not make us competitive. That has to be done with shoring up some massive gaps in the surrounding societal fabric. We should be taking new looks at old problems and developing innovation as a solultion rather than merely throwing money at the problem. Until we see what is being proposed and why, it's awful tough to make a case for or against this entire plan. I've seen some things that largely fly under the radar with this adminstratin that I like, and hopefully that's indicative of how they'll handle problems on a wider scale.

BTW...there's a controversial "buy America" provision in this document thats worth taking a look at.

[Rigs11]

8 yrs to screw it up riggs? Cmon Bushes economy was not bad for 8 yrs. All Presidents will have ups and downs over 8 yrs, unless they get lucky.

Obamas economy will get better but it will just be natural market factors that account for it.

I will judge Obama on health care, inflation, energy bill, supreme court nominees, Israel Palestinian issue etc.

I just don't think Presidents control economy as much as we think.

Did I say it was bad the whole time? How did he leave it for Obama?Your notion that presidents don't affect the economy is laughable. So it's just a coincidence that the economy is better when dems are in power? You get sillier with every post.

http://angrybear.blogspot.com/2007/02/god-punishes-us-when-we-collectively_19.html

[Bob]

I definitely did not mention that I was throwing out hypothetical numbers.

If the government were only investing in infrastructure, I'd agree that it would help the future and be an investment. Instead though, they're trying to get cash into the hands of the citizens. That cash is going to China through the trade deficit. My example was that since more money is going out than coming back in, the stimulus that the federal government is trying to force into the economy is just flowing out to China.

It's simple, the trade deficit shows we are not competitive in the global market.

Not sure about your last comment ---

How does one compete against slave & child labor? Not sure if one wants to win that race to the bottom...

[That One Guy]

I definitely did not mention that I was throwing out hypothetical numbers.

If the government were only investing in infrastructure, I'd agree that it would help the future and be an investment. Instead though, they're trying to get cash into the hands of the citizens. That cash is going to China through the trade deficit. My example was that since more money is going out than coming back in, the stimulus that the federal government is trying to force into the economy is just flowing out to China.

It's simple, the trade deficit shows we are not competitive in the global market.

Not sure about your last comment ---

How does one compete against slave & child labor? Not sure if one wants to win that race to the bottom...

Agreed, we take a moral stand against those things but that makes us uncompetitive on the global market. That may mean it's time to change either policies to protect American producers or to lower our expectations and stop spending debt to hold the American standard of living above water.

As long as we continue to buy from competitors who have an advantage, more money will continue to flow out than flows in. That's gonna cause problems for Americans.

EDIT: and I mean change policies in the way of taxing imports, not allowing child or slave labor.

[Garcia Bronco]

Okay I will play along ............ How so ? you think it is funny , that no one knew just how bad Bush ****ed up the economy ?
Iwouldnt be laughing to much if I were you , Bush ****ed up royally , and you was one of them down here defending him .....

Obama and Biden both were in the Congress that passed the budgets 4 years before Bush left office. They are to blame as much as anybody as well.

[cutthemdown]

Obama and Biden both were in the Congress that passed the budgets 4 years before Bush left office. They are to blame as much as anybody as well.

Also Biden and Obama made predictions on what economy would do after there budget was passed. They made rosy predictions as far as growth and tax revenue go so they could say they were on target for a balanced budget down the road.

Now they want to say it was worst then they thought? No they knew all along it would take some time to recover but they wanted to get there budget passed so the made up numbers.

Didn't really matter as it seems people in Congress don't even bother to read the stuff anymore. They just look to party leaders and vote accordingly.

We really need to think about voting in about 10-15 more independents into congress, and maybe about 3-4 senators.

I really think that could help.

[cutthemdown]

Most of the money spent so far for the stimulus was to float medicare cash to states. Really most of it unspent at this point. That's what happens when you allocate money, then figure out how to spend it.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Most of the money spent so far for the stimulus was to float medicare cash to states. Really most of it unspent at this point. That's what happens when you allocate money, then figure out how to spend it.
You do know that an itimized list of expenditures listing the dollar amounts gong to each recipient is available right? How does that equate to figuring out later how to spend it? Example: NASA is getting $1 billion. Are you saying we need to know right now how NASA is spending that money? If so...that is simply impossible. Even NASA won't know that yet.

[cutthemdown]

You do know that an itimized list of expenditures listing the dollar amounts gong to each recipient is available right? How does that equate to figuring out later how to spend it? Example: NASA is getting $1 billion. Are you saying we need to know right now how NASA is spending that money? If so...that is simply impossible. Even NASA won't know that yet.

exactly footsteps why give Nasa 1 billion unless they need it for something specific?

[footstepsfrom#27]

exactly footsteps why give Nasa 1 billion unless they need it for something specific?
That's foolishness. NASA, like any other government agency or private firm that does research and development, is only able to conduct that research when they have funds to pay for it. I think it should be obvious...if you spoke personally with individuals in different departments within NASA that you'd find all kinds of ideas they are working on...but consolidating those ideas at the executive decision making level into an "answer" on specifics? That happens AFTER they know what kind of budget they're working with.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Obama and Biden both were in the Congress that passed the budgets 4 years before Bush left office. They are to blame as much as anybody as well.
I know you're smarter than this.

[Spider]

Obama and Biden both were in the Congress that passed the budgets 4 years before Bush left office. They are to blame as much as anybody as well.

it is a post like this , that makes it so damn hard for me to be nice or respectful ........ everytime I log on down here , I always say to myself Spider ( thats what call my self when I am not on line ) this time , cut the bull**** , stop calling people bedwetters , idiots , and dumbass , treat others how you want ot be treated , disagree but be respectful , i will say there are few here that can make that good will go out the window ............

[elsid13]

You do know that an itimized list of expenditures listing the dollar amounts gong to each recipient is available right? How does that equate to figuring out later how to spend it? Example: NASA is getting $1 billion. Are you saying we need to know right now how NASA is spending that money? If so...that is simply impossible. Even NASA won't know that yet.

Actually NASA and other federal agencies know how they are going to spend the money. The problem is that the federal acquisition process takes time, and the federal government doesn't have enough contracting officers in place which also slows the process down.

[elsid13]

That's foolishness. NASA, like any other government agency or private firm that does research and development, is only able to conduct that research when they have funds to pay for it. I think it should be obvious...if you spoke personally with individuals in different departments within NASA that you'd find all kinds of ideas they are working on...but consolidating those ideas at the executive decision making level into an "answer" on specifics? That happens AFTER they know what kind of budget they're working with.

Actually that not the case, agencies have strong idea were they are going spend the TOA for next 3 years, and have very strong idea what the major programs will be for the next 7 to 10.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Actually that not the case, agencies have strong idea were they are going spend the TOA for next 3 years, and have very strong idea what the major programs will be for the next 7 to 10.
His statement had to do with witholding funds unless they expressed "something specific", but the crux of my point was...you can't expect specifics unless they know what kind of budget they're working with. Obviously they know what they'd like to do...planning to do it however, requires knowing you have a budget to work with. That's all I'm saying.

[Garcia Bronco]

I know you're smarter than this.

And I know you are a Texas man that doesn't like George Bush and wants to hold only him accountable for the problemsin Government when it is actully the fault of mnay people. Including Barak Obama.

[Odysseus]

8 yrs to screw it up riggs? Cmon Bushes economy was not bad for 8 yrs. All Presidents will have ups and downs over 8 yrs, unless they get lucky.

Obamas economy will get better but it will just be natural market factors that account for it.

I will judge Obama on health care, inflation, energy bill, supreme court nominees, Israel Palestinian issue etc.

I just don't think Presidents control economy as much as we think.

Bush had serious issues long before things went sour. How do you burn capital on two wars and not be responsible for the eventual empire burning destruction that follows?

President's are cheerleaders and Biden's gaff is just stating the obvious. You think that the pundits in Washington have this thing sorted out? We have the best and the brightest getting their butts beat. Why? How do you encourage people to spend when there is no credit, jobs are disappearing daily, no savings and the whole illusion of safety keeps cracking like a glacier in an ice age? Bush had problems long before those issues brought forward fruit. How do you burn that kind of capital...still burn it... and fix anything?

We are getting bled of cash, value and technology. We are a bloody mess right now and anybody of any ilk knows this. Nobody can fix this economy. It is going to take YEARS for things to get right. Obama cannot take a full measure of blame no matter what gaff Biden comes up with.

[spdirty]

Typical. Biden admits they ****ed up and the bootlickers circle the wagons and go back to Bush. ::)

[Odysseus]

Actually that not the case, agencies have strong idea were they are going spend the TOA for next 3 years, and have very strong idea what the major programs will be for the next 7 to 10.

The problem with this is how do you stop a problem from perpetuating? Thus it is a very large boat that is very very hard to turn around.

[Odysseus]

Obama and Biden both were in the Congress that passed the budgets 4 years before Bush left office. They are to blame as much as anybody as well.

You mean they voted FOR Bush? When?

[Rohirrim]

Typical. Biden admits they ****ed up and the bootlickers circle the wagons and go back to Bush. ::)

So, Bush sets the economy on fire, Biden says, "It's going to take a lot more water than we thought to put this out" and now the fire-damage is his fault? Rightard logic. :~ohyah!:

[Garcia Bronco]

You mean they voted FOR Bush? When?

They voted with Bush.

[Garcia Bronco]

So, Bush sets the economy on fire, Biden says, "It's going to take a lot more water than we thought to put this out" and now the fire-damage is his fault? Rightard logic. :~ohyah!:

Bush wasn't the only one that set it on fire. You need to add the 106th - thru this congress and include Bill Clinton. Don't forget the banks and so on. It ain't one person. Tell it right for once in your life.

[Rohirrim]

Bush wasn't the only one that set it on fire. You need to add the 106th - thru this congress and include Bill Clinton. Don't forget the banks and so on. It ain't one person. Tell it right for once in your life.


Sure, there were a bunch of enablers. But Bush and his cabal did the spending. Bush took the biggest budget surplus in history and in eight years turned it into the biggest deficit. Get your lips off his ass.

[spdirty]

So, Bush sets the economy on fire, Biden says, "It's going to take a lot more water than we thought to put this out" and now the fire-damage is his fault? Rightard logic. :~ohyah!:

Actually, its like your pet monkey plays with matches, sets your house on fire, gets out of the house, and the fire department comes along and sprays the fire with gasoline, then comes back and says "we misread that this was a fire, and we shouldve used water instead of gasoline to put this out."

[Rohirrim]

Actually, its like your pet monkey plays with matches, sets your house on fire, gets out of the house, and the fire department comes along and sprays the fire with gasoline, then comes back and says "we misread that this was a fire, and we shouldve used water instead of gasoline to put this out."

So, in this analogy, Bush is the pet monkey?

[TailgateNut]

They voted with Bush.

Bush voted on bills in the Senate or the House??? News to me.

[TailgateNut]

So, in this analogy, Bush is the pet monkey?


Pet Monkey/ Village Idiot. It's all good to his apologists.

[spdirty]

So, in this analogy, Bush is the pet monkey?

Yep, but the monkey is gone, and wont be doing any more damage. And actually I need to amend what I said. The Obama admin isnt thinking about using water to put the fire out, they are switching from gasoline to hairspray. Then maybe they'll try kerosine, and later propane. And while they continue to make the fire worse, their supporters will continue to harp on the monkey rather than try to ACTUALLY put the fire out using water.

[Rohirrim]

Yep, but the monkey is gone, and wont be doing any more damage. And actually I need to amend what I said. The Obama admin isnt thinking about using water to put the fire out, they are switching from gasoline to hairspray. Then maybe they'll try kerosine, and later propane. And while they continue to make the fire worse, their supporters will continue to harp on the monkey rather than try to ACTUALLY put the fire out using water.

If not bail outs and stimulus packages, what would you have suggested they do? Let the derivatives failure crash the national economy?

Here's a better analogy. The pet monkey, Bush, sets the house on fire. The Obama crew shows up to put it out, but they didn't bring enough equipment. However, while they haven't extinguished it, they at least have brought the fire under control. Meanwhile, the rightards show up and start shouting, "There was no fire! Obama has destroyed a perfectly fine house."

[Dukes]

it is a post like this , that makes it so damn hard for me to be nice or respectful ........ everytime I log on down here , I always say to myself Spider ( thats what call my self when I am not on line ) this time , cut the bull**** , stop calling people bedwetters , idiots , and dumbass , treat others how you want ot be treated , disagree but be respectful , i will say there are few here that can make that good will go out the window ............

I like you better when you're angry ;D

[rastaman]

What I don't seem to understand and don't see discussed is how any of this can be expected to truly save America when the trade deficit is as large as it is. If the government "gives" a dollar to a citizen to stimulate the economy and .30 of it instantly goes to China or some other world market, that's bad. The government just then spent $1 for .70 of stimulus. That .70 will recirculate to another American job who may then send a bit more of it to China. Eventually, unless the trade deficit settles, all of our money is funneling out and American jobs aren't being improved.

China loans us money which goes right back into the Chinese economy. We're paying for Chinese growth and running up debt to do it. We are China's stimulus package.

Unless we find a way to beat the world, debt is the only way we can sustain our economy and we've all seen what a debt economy eventually does. Bottomless debt got us here but seems to be the only answer out. Can it work?

Great points Cah412! The dirty little secret about the trade deficits/imbalance starts with incremental stripping away of America's trade tarrifs and global trade. Here's a bit of history (had to search deep to find this article) that brings it all together of why we find ourselves in this horrible trade deficit-imbalance. It sure didnt happen over night.

Anyone who examines U.S. trade and tariff history quickly learns that the USA did not practice free trade before 1933. From the early days of the republic until 1933, America practiced a policy of high tariffs expressly designed to protect domestic manufacturing. Over the period 1820-1933, tariffs ranged from 35 to 50 percent. Henry Clay and later Abraham Lincoln supported the policy. This “protectionism” actually worked well and America experienced great prosperity. The country developed a formidable industrial base that later helped us win two World Wars. In America’s protected home market, industrial wages soon rose above those in Europe because American workers did not have to compete against foreign workers earning a fraction of their wage.

In 1933, the USA’s trade policy underwent a complete and radical 180 degree paradigm change. Suddenly a successful century-long policy of protective tariffs was gone; gone and replaced by a new-to-the-U.S. policy of free trade. The principal agent of change in 1933 was Franklin Roosevelt’s then new Secretary of State Cordell Hull.

Hull was a former congressman and senator, and a co-sponsor of the 1913 bill creating the U.S. income tax. Hull considered himself a visionary on the subject of free trade which he was firmly convinced would create nothing less than world peace by eliminating trade rivalries that he believed were the principal cause of all war. Hull took his inspiration from Woodrow Wilson’s famous 14 points for peace after the first World War, point 3 having been a call for “open trade”.

During most of the remainder of the 1930s and again at the close of World War II, Hull used his knowledge of the workings of Congress and the authority ceded him by FDR to have a series of trade bills enacted which codified his free trade philosophy; thus setting this country on the trajectory we are on today.

Hull never envisioned a 2009 wherein American workers are forced to compete against third world workers paid as little as 30 cents per hour. Henry Clay and Abraham Lincoln would never have countenanced this threat to American wages.

Nowadays, American manufacturers often transform into virtual shell companies which are merely importers that contract actual manufacturing overseas to save up to 90% and more on wage costs.

Sometimes referred to as “labor arbitrage”, outsourcing manufacturing is a pernicious business plan in which greed displaces a former sense of a shared community and a formerly implicit social contract among Americans.

Outsourcing has a snowball effect because some companies may feel compelled to outsource in order to stay in business if their competitors have already moved manufacturing overseas to cut costs. The American worker is now expendable.

http://www.onepennysheet.com/?p=21172

[Rohirrim]

Nowadays, American manufacturers often transform into virtual shell companies which are merely importers that contract actual manufacturing overseas to save up to 90% and more on wage costs.

Sometimes referred to as “labor arbitrage”, outsourcing manufacturing is a pernicious business plan in which greed displaces a former sense of a shared community and a formerly implicit social contract among Americans.

Outsourcing has a snowball effect because some companies may feel compelled to outsource in order to stay in business if their competitors have already moved manufacturing overseas to cut costs. The American worker is now expendable.

Wait a second. I thought Clinton told us we were all going to get rich in the new "service economy?"

[cutthemdown]

We probably had more outsourcing under Clinton then any president.

I actually lost my job right as Clinton was leaving office. It got outsourced to India, no lie. I was a computer operator for a bank. Came in, ran all the updates, made all the bkups, etc etc. All those jobs gone now, only a few banks even have computer centers in Calif anymore. There are some in Arizona but most went overseas.

Just how it goes though i didn't blame Clinton, I just went into a different field and found new ways to make money.


IMO Americans just expect too much from the president. You have to make your life good by yourself, really you ain't going to get much help from the govt. IMO there job is just to give us a safe and fair environment to try and get it done!!!!

[Rigs11]

If not bail outs and stimulus packages, what would you have suggested they do? Let the derivatives failure crash the national economy?

Here's a better analogy. The pet monkey, Bush, sets the house on fire. The Obama crew shows up to put it out, but they didn't bring enough equipment. However, while they haven't extinguished it, they at least have brought the fire under control. Meanwhile, the rightards show up and start shouting, "There was no fire! Obama has destroyed a perfectly fine house."

Hilarious! No the rightards would simply tell everyone that the fire would put itself out.

[Garcia Bronco]

We probably had more outsourcing under Clinton then any president.

I actually lost my job right as Clinton was leaving office. It got outsourced to India, no lie. I was a computer operator for a bank. Came in, ran all the updates, made all the bkups, etc etc. All those jobs gone now, only a few banks even have computer centers in Calif anymore. There are some in Arizona but most went overseas.

Just how it goes though i didn't blame Clinton, I just went into a different field and found new ways to make money.


IMO Americans just expect too much from the president. You have to make your life good by yourself, really you ain't going to get much help from the govt. IMO there job is just to give us a safe and fair environment to try and get it done!!!!


Move to North Carolina. Those banks are still her in the states in most if not all operations

[Garcia Bronco]

Bush voted on bills in the Senate or the House??? News to me.

I can get you a slide rule to figure out what I am saying, but most wouldn't need it to be so.

[rastaman]

We probably had more outsourcing under Clinton then any president.

I actually lost my job right as Clinton was leaving office. It got outsourced to India, no lie. I was a computer operator for a bank. Came in, ran all the updates, made all the bkups, etc etc. All those jobs gone now, only a few banks even have computer centers in Calif anymore. There are some in Arizona but most went overseas.

Just how it goes though i didn't blame Clinton, I just went into a different field and found new ways to make money.


IMO Americans just expect too much from the president. You have to make your life good by yourself, really you ain't going to get much help from the govt. IMO there job is just to give us a safe and fair environment to try and get it done!!!!

Cutt, the rules of the game of business are defined by government. Any sports fan can tell you that football, baseball, or hockey without rules and referees would be a mess. Similarly, business without rules won't work.

Which explains why conservative economics wiped out the middle class during the period from 1880 to 1932, and why, when Reagan again began applying conservative economics, the middle class again began to vanish in America in the 1980s - a process that has dramatically picked up steam under George W. Bush. And now we see the current outcome.

The conservative mantra is "let the market decide." But there is no market independent of government!, so what they're really saying is, "Stop corporations from defending workers and building a middle class, and let the corporations decide how much to pay for labor and how to trade." This is, at best, destructive to national and international economies, and, at worst, destructive to democracy itself.

However, no one is talking about how America returns to a prosperous middle class! Lets all keep in mind and remember the "middle class" is not the natural result of freeing business to do whatever it wants, of "free and open markets," or of "free trade." The "middle class" is not a normal result of "free markets." Those policies will produce a small but powerful wealthy class, a small "middle" mercantilist class, and a huge and terrified worker class which have traditionally been called "serfs."

Markets are a creation of government, just as corporations exist only by authorization of government. Governments set the rules of the market. And, since our government is of, by, and for We The People, those rules have historically been set to first maximize the public good resulting from people doing business.

[spdirty]

If not bail outs and stimulus packages, what would you have suggested they do? Let the derivatives failure crash the national economy?

Here's a better analogy. The pet monkey, Bush, sets the house on fire. The Obama crew shows up to put it out, but they didn't bring enough equipment. However, while they haven't extinguished it, they at least have brought the fire under control. Meanwhile, the rightards show up and start shouting, "There was no fire! Obama has destroyed a perfectly fine house."

Oh so you think this shlts under control? You ought to spend a day with me, we'll go to some project managers of these construction companies and ask them if they think this economy is under control. Im definitely scared shltless right now but not nearly as bad as our competitors and customers.

To go back to your analogy they are pouring more and more gas on this fire talking about how great a job they did bringing it under control, half the country is saying "STOP!!! YOU IDIOTS SWITCH TO WATER OR QUIT ****ING WITH IT!!!" To which the reply is "well the monkey started the fire. Our messiah is doing all he can right now so shut up."

Its ****ing Alice in wonderland anymore.

[cutthemdown]

Move to North Carolina. Those banks are still her in the states in most if not all operations

I could have went to Arizona and worked for the same boss but I went in a different direction. Working for banks stinks they are cheap. Plus the mainframe I ran was sort of outdated anyways.

All this went down just before Bush took office around the y2k thing. If it wasn't for y2k they would have sent me walking probably a yr earlier so I did cash in some on that one with all the stupid overtime.

I wonder how much money was wasted preparing for that one?

So North Carolina huh? Man I just can't see it. I just love California, why I have no idea. I guess part of it is all the places to play music, see music etc.

I would rather live in Nashville/NY/Chicago etc if I went East.

Austin Texas seems pretty cool and I have some musician friends I know who moved there and say they did it. But I really like a more liberal state then texas.

I have always felt conservative feds, liberal states worked well, but I don't know anymore everything seems sort of crappy. I think special interests and lobbyist just killing it.

[Rohirrim]

Oh so you think this shlts under control? You ought to spend a day with me, we'll go to some project managers of these construction companies and ask them if they think this economy is under control. Im definitely scared shltless right now but not nearly as bad as our competitors and customers.

To go back to your analogy they are pouring more and more gas on this fire talking about how great a job they did bringing it under control, half the country is saying "STOP!!! YOU IDIOTS SWITCH TO WATER OR QUIT ****ING WITH IT!!!" To which the reply is "well the monkey started the fire. Our messiah is doing all he can right now so shut up."

Its ****ing Alice in wonderland anymore.

And still, not one person on the Right on this board has answered this question: What should Obama have done instead of what he did?

[cutthemdown]

Cutt, the rules of the game of business are defined by government. Any sports fan can tell you that football, baseball, or hockey without rules and referees would be a mess. Similarly, business without rules won't work.

Which explains why conservative economics wiped out the middle class during the period from 1880 to 1932, and why, when Reagan again began applying conservative economics, the middle class again began to vanish in America in the 1980s - a process that has dramatically picked up steam under George W. Bush. And now we see the current outcome.

The conservative mantra is "let the market decide." But there is no market independent of government!, so what they're really saying is, "Stop corporations from defending workers and building a middle class, and let the corporations decide how much to pay for labor and how to trade." This is, at best, destructive to national and international economies, and, at worst, destructive to democracy itself.

However, no one is talking about how America returns to a prosperous middle class! Lets all keep in mind and remember the "middle class" is not the natural result of freeing business to do whatever it wants, of "free and open markets," or of "free trade." The "middle class" is not a normal result of "free markets." Those policies will produce a small but powerful wealthy class, a small "middle" mercantilist class, and a huge and terrified worker class which have traditionally been called "serfs."

Markets are a creation of government, just as corporations exist only by authorization of government. Governments set the rules of the market. And, since our government is of, by, and for We The People, those rules have historically been set to first maximize the public good resulting from people doing business.

I agree with a lot of this but I'm having trouble understanding how pumping money into it, but directing it to the spots you want, IE auto union, etc is fair to the overall market you want created.

Even the housing bailout hurts people who don't own homes yet.

So I do understand but what I don't understand is forcing a new market out there. If the govt forces a drastic change to things like energy and health care, how does that grow the middle class?

I have no problem with taxing peoples incomes over 250 grand. I have no problem with forcing corporation to pay there tax, stopping CEO's from using capital gains to pay 15% instead of the 30% plus they should be paying.

My problem is the taxes for the middle class. I don't feel there is a chance the energy bill and health care bill will be as cheap as they say.

They already admit there projections on the economy were way off. What makes you think these ones are better?

Obama has yet to prove to me these won't raise the taxes on us all. Has he you?

[barryr]

What a surprise. A thread about Biden and associates not able to figure out the economy and it becomes a Bush bashing post. Just shocking. When have no other answer, resort to deflection and change the subject.

[elsid13]

The problem with this is how do you stop a problem from perpetuating? Thus it is a very large boat that is very very hard to turn around.

Killing any program is very hard because people become dependent on them for a number of reason. Like everyone else I know that we could save billions on stupid things that have been around since the 50s.

[That One Guy]

And still, not one person on the Right on this board has answered this question: What should Obama have done instead of what he did?

It's a tough pill to swallow but you can't risk everyone to hold the ailing above water. By that, I mean there's a point at which you have to go back to the drawing board and only keep above water those which it is feasible to do so for. Everyone wants their grandma to be able to afford her meds but can we continue to support that and less deserving programs at the cost of the health of the American economy?

The problem is that anyone who makes that tough decision is the scapegoat for every president who has come before them and passed unhealthy bills to cater to the constituency. The economy right now cannot support Medicare, Medicade, SSI, Welfare, etc unless we're all willing to foot a much larger bill. California is facing that problem and struggling as everyone refuses to make the tough decision. The federal government doesn't have to make that decision though, they can just draw more debt. That well has a bottom though.

[TailgateNut]

It's a tough pill to swallow but you can't risk everyone to hold the ailing above water. By that, I mean there's a point at which you have to go back to the drawing board and only keep above water those which it is feasible to do so for. Everyone wants their grandma to be able to afford her meds but can we continue to support that and less deserving programs at the cost of the health of the American economy?

The problem is that anyone who makes that tough decision is the scapegoat for every president who has come before them and passed unhealthy bills to cater to the constituency. The economy right now cannot support Medicare, Medicade, SSI, Welfare, etc unless we're all willing to foot a much larger bill. California is facing that problem and struggling as everyone refuses to make the tough decision. The federal government doesn't have to make that decision though, they can just draw more debt. That well has a bottom though.


Tighten up on our illegal immigration. Send them packing for locations south of the border. It will solve a few problems we are currently dealing with.

Unemployment: Although I constantly hear the drivel that Americans will not do the work, I believe HUNGRY AMERICANS WILL DO THAT WORK, and it willl get them off of the government assistance programs which are strugglin g to make ends meet.

Health care costs will be reduced by $$billions. No more going to the local emergency room with fake ID's to get free (subsidized by insurance co's and taxpayers) health care.

Public education costs/ budgets will be drastically reduced once the hordes of offspring are not being afforded free education.



Now to WELFARE: If you are recieving goverment $$$ and are able to function, regardless of how limited that function is, you will perform some sort of duty for your pay. A duty which benefits those who pay taxes for your check. No damn excuses!

[That One Guy]

Tighten up on our illegal immigration. Send them packing for locations south of the border. It will solve a few problems we are currently dealing with.

Unemployment: Although I constantly hear the drivel that Americans will not do the work, I believe HUNGRY AMERICANS WILL DO THAT WORK, and it willl get them off of the government assistance programs which are strugglin g to make ends meet.

Health care costs will be reduced by $$billions. No more going to the local emergency room with fake ID's to get free (subsidized by insurance co's and taxpayers) health care.

Public education costs/ budgets will be drastically reduced once the hordes of offspring are not being afforded free education.



Now to WELFARE: If you are recieving goverment $$$ and are able to function, regardless of how limited that function is, you will perform some sort of duty for your pay. A duty which benefits those who pay taxes for your check. No damn excuses!

I'm sold. We don't agree often but those are the things that I think should've been happening despite the economy so we can definitely agree here.

[TailgateNut]

I'm sold. We don't agree often but those are the things that I think should've been happening despite the economy so we can definitely agree here.

Many want to ignore the financial implications of illegal immigration. It may not have "meant much" when our economy was booming, but now it is exponentially more damaging to not only the federal budgets, but especially the state coffers.

[Bob]

[QUOTE=Bob;2465241]

Agreed, we take a moral stand against those things but that makes us uncompetitive on the global market. That may mean it's time to change either policies to protect American producers or to lower our expectations and stop spending debt to hold the American standard of living above water.

As long as we continue to buy from competitors who have an advantage, more money will continue to flow out than flows in. That's gonna cause problems for Americans.

EDIT: and I mean change policies in the way of taxing imports, not allowing child or slave labor.

I heard of a miror tax idea once that proposed the idea that we simply tax others as they tax our products -- it is surprising that we dont already do this, and are more often on the short end of that trading relationship.

[Bob]

The problem with this is how do you stop a problem from perpetuating? Thus it is a very large boat that is very very hard to turn around.

Spot on!

Kinda makes one think that almost no one wants to change anything, too much power to grab here boys and girls. I mean, why stop at muted traditional presidential powers, when you can take upon yourself Czar-like powers.

[Odysseus]

We probably had more outsourcing under Clinton then any president.

I actually lost my job right as Clinton was leaving office. It got outsourced to India, no lie. I was a computer operator for a bank. Came in, ran all the updates, made all the bkups, etc etc. All those jobs gone now, only a few banks even have computer centers in Calif anymore. There are some in Arizona but most went overseas.

Just how it goes though i didn't blame Clinton, I just went into a different field and found new ways to make money.


IMO Americans just expect too much from the president. You have to make your life good by yourself, really you ain't going to get much help from the govt. IMO there job is just to give us a safe and fair environment to try and get it done!!!!

Agreed. It does not matter who the President. It's a liars club. You need to look at the lay of the land and decide your own fate.

[Odysseus]

Killing any program is very hard because people become dependent on them for a number of reason. Like everyone else I know that we could save billions on stupid things that have been around since the 50s.

Obama is finding out that sacred cows have horns and don't want to be grilled.

[rastaman]

Obama is finding out that sacred cows have horns and don't want to be grilled.

Obama is surrounded by powerful influential entities that could take down his Presidency. He's going to have to show he's the ultimate Chess Player.

[That One Guy]

[QUOTE=cah412;2465938]

I heard of a miror tax idea once that proposed the idea that we simply tax others as they tax our products -- it is surprising that we dont already do this, and are more often on the short end of that trading relationship.

I believe that's actually used more commonly when anyone tries to overly tax our products. That's why more areas use claims like Europe did over the beef scare to refuse some of our products.

The reason we have to tax though is so that Chinese made trinkets produced on the backs of $2 an hour labor can't stamp out American made trinkets produced on the backs of the minimum wage $7 an hour.

[footstepsfrom#27]

[QUOTE=Bob;2470642]

I believe that's actually used more commonly when anyone tries to overly tax our products. That's why more areas use claims like Europe did over the beef scare to refuse some of our products.

The reason we have to tax though is so that Chinese made trinkets produced on the backs of $2 an hour labor can't stamp out American made trinkets produced on the backs of the minimum wage $7 an hour.
I think Chinese laborers make a lot less than $2 an hour..it might be 25 cents an hour.

[That One Guy]

[QUOTE=cah412;2474836]
I think Chinese laborers make a lot less than $2 an hour..it might be 25 cents an hour.

Pfft... I can't be bothered with simple details!

Nah, it was just to make the point. I don't know what anyone else makes but we can't compare when the two products are put into equal competition.