Interesting Thought

[Rohirrim]

What did the economy look like when Bush entered office?

What did it look like when he left?

That is all.

Vote for Republicans!

[Bob]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

What did the economy look like when Bush entered office?

What did it look like when he left?

That is all.

Vote for Republicans!

The bailouts were horrific....unemployment was up -- I dont remember how much. Another bad thing that happend was keeping interest rates too low for too long, which created a housing bubble.

But in farness, 911 and Katrina played some role in dragging the economy down.

[W*GS]

Originally Posted by Bob

But in farness, 911 and Katrina played some role in dragging the economy down.

Neither had a significant economic impact on the national economy.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Bob

The bailouts were horrific....unemployment was up -- I dont remember how much. Another bad thing that happend was keeping interest rates too low for too long, which created a housing bubble.

But in farness, 911 and Katrina played some role in dragging the economy down.

Give us all a break, will ya? Bush squandered the wealth of this country spending like a drunken sailor while throwing totally irresponsible tax breaks out to his "base." He was a disaster for this country. And you a-holes on the Right are so lacking in class and character that you blame the guy who follows him for the mess, even obstructing the clean up at every turn.

[orinjkrush]

the depth of the elite's depravity knows no limit.

the "work" they do lessens all of us.

it will be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle....

[barryr]

, the liberals can't tell us all the great Obama has done to fix the economy, help the job situation, and don't bother talking about the debt since a lost cause, and created a mess with his Obamacare, so they are forced to go back to talking about Bush. Predictable as always.

[Paladin]

I wonder why the Repugnican candidates don't talk about their admiration for Dubya. Or even Cheaney.

Are there any of them have cojones enough to talk about him and his "legacy"? Ron Paul doesn't count because he is not a repugnican. He is a leper........

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

What did the economy look like when Bush entered office?

What did it look like when he left?

That is all.

Vote for Republicans!

It's unfortunate that people don't understand the the president works for the Federal Reserve, not the other way around. The real question is, who does the Federal Reserve work for (Looking at the money trail, I'd say Goldman Sachs).

Bush isn't any more responsible for the economy than Obama is to this one. This entire mess was created by the federal reserve, and by congress. Presidents just sign off on this stuff because that's their job. That's what they were paid to do. There's a reason why Goldman Sach's is a top contributor to both Romney and Obama (not to mention George W. Bush).

[Paladin]

Link?

[Bob]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Give us all a break, will ya? Bush squandered the wealth of this country spending like a drunken sailor while throwing totally irresponsible tax breaks out to his "base." He was a disaster for this country. And you a-holes on the Right are so lacking in class and character that you blame the guy who follows him for the mess, even obstructing the clean up at every turn.

Interesting and disproportionate level of venom...

Bush did spend like crazy, I agree with you there. Ive been a doomsday we are spending too much kind of guy since perot started playing with his pie charts...

If Obama had spent less than bush, you would have a valid point, but as he amplified the moronic spending policies of Bush, its hard to for anyone to defend Obama, or take you seriously -- that you are concerned about spending.

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Give us all a break, will ya? Bush squandered the wealth of this country spending like a drunken sailor while throwing totally irresponsible tax breaks out to his "base." He was a disaster for this country. And you a-holes on the Right are so lacking in class and character that you blame the guy who follows him for the mess, even obstructing the clean up at every turn.

These guys work for the same base.


Cash Contributors to George W. Bush

Morgan Stanley $603,480
Merrill Lynch $586,254
PricewaterhouseCoopers $514,250
UBS AG $474,325
Goldman Sachs $394,600
Lehman Brothers $361,525
MBNA Corp $350,350
Credit Suisse Group $326,040
Citigroup Inc $320,820
Bear Stearns $313,150
Ernst & Young $305,140
US Government $295,786
Deloitte LLP $292,250
Wachovia Corp $279,310
US Dept of Defense $279,157
Ameriquest Capital $253,130
US Dept of State $225,330
Blank Rome LLP $225,150
Bank of America $218,261
AT&T Inc $214,920






Cash Contributors to Obama

University of California $1,648,685
Goldman Sachs $1,013,091
Harvard University $878,164
Microsoft Corp $852,167
Google Inc $814,540
JPMorgan Chase & Co $808,799
Citigroup Inc $736,771
Time Warner $624,618
Sidley Austin LLP $600,298
Stanford University $595,716
National Amusements Inc $563,798
WilmerHale LLP $550,668
Columbia University $547,852
Skadden, Arps et al $543,539
UBS AG $532,674
IBM Corp $532,372
General Electric $529,855
US Government $513,308
Morgan Stanley $512,232
Latham & Watkins $503,295

[barryr]

Originally Posted by Taco John

These guys work for the same base.


Cash Contributors to George W. Bush

Morgan Stanley $603,480
Merrill Lynch $586,254
PricewaterhouseCoopers $514,250
UBS AG $474,325
Goldman Sachs $394,600
Lehman Brothers $361,525
MBNA Corp $350,350
Credit Suisse Group $326,040
Citigroup Inc $320,820
Bear Stearns $313,150
Ernst & Young $305,140
US Government $295,786
Deloitte LLP $292,250
Wachovia Corp $279,310
US Dept of Defense $279,157
Ameriquest Capital $253,130
US Dept of State $225,330
Blank Rome LLP $225,150
Bank of America $218,261
AT&T Inc $214,920






Cash Contributors to Obama

University of California $1,648,685
Goldman Sachs $1,013,091
Harvard University $878,164
Microsoft Corp $852,167
Google Inc $814,540
JPMorgan Chase & Co $808,799
Citigroup Inc $736,771
Time Warner $624,618
Sidley Austin LLP $600,298
Stanford University $595,716
National Amusements Inc $563,798
WilmerHale LLP $550,668
Columbia University $547,852
Skadden, Arps et al $543,539
UBS AG $532,674
IBM Corp $532,372
General Electric $529,855
US Government $513,308
Morgan Stanley $512,232
Latham & Watkins $503,295

Goldman Sachs gave to both and look how they have people in there in the WH, especially with Obama. But it's just the republicans who cater to the wealthy

[sinuous sausage]

Originally Posted by W*GS

Neither had a significant economic impact on the national economy.

lol wut

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economi...ber_11_attacks

[sinuous sausage]

Originally Posted by barryr

Goldman Sachs gave to both and look how they have people in there in the WH, especially with Obama. But it's just the republicans who cater to the wealthy

libs want to keep the poor poor. despite all their ballyhooing and moral indignation, many libs would lose a sense of identity and their soure of power if people actually started doing well for themselves. Look at all the inner cities, heavily-unionized states, over-leveraged countries: Attempts at social engineering rape the middle and lower classes. But somehow they think emotional arguments trump any sort of sober look at economic theory and the realities of human nature.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by sinuous sausage

libs want to keep the poor poor. despite all their ballyhooing and moral indignation, many libs would lose a sense of identity and their soure of power if people actually started doing well for themselves. Look at all the inner cities, heavily-unionized states, over-leveraged countries: Attempts at social engineering rape the middle and lower classes. But somehow they think emotional arguments trump any sort of sober look at economic theory and the realities of human nature.

Nothing I love better than a recitation of the mythology and dogmas of the Right to start my day. Yes, we're all just little shoe cobblers operating in Adam Smith's capitalist utopia. Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps, doggone it. Social programs are the cause of your suffering, poor people. Those evil liberals are trying to manipulate you with food stamps and unemployment insurance. Get rid of all that government assistance and you'll be free, free, free. Your problem is that you just don't understand human nature or economic theory. If you did, you'd understand that when the global financiers and capitalists sent your jobs overseas, they were doing it for your own good. See? Now they pay much cheaper wages overseas, their stock prices go up, their dividends go up, and they can create a whole bunch of new jobs. You poor people shouldn't be wasting your time with that liberal social engineering! You should be learning Mandarin so you can tap into some of those new jobs those job creators are creating! It's a brave new world!

[sinuous sausage]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Nothing I love better than a recitation of the mythology and dogmas of the Right to start my day. Yes, we're all just little shoe cobblers operating in Adam Smith's capitalist utopia. Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps, doggone it. Social programs are the cause of your suffering, poor people. Those evil liberals are trying to manipulate you with food stamps and unemployment insurance. Get rid of all that government assistance and you'll be free, free, free. Your problem is that you just don't understand human nature or economic theory. If you did, you'd understand that when the global financiers and capitalists sent your jobs overseas, they were doing it for your own good. See? Now they pay much cheaper wages overseas, their stock prices go up, their dividends go up, and they can create a whole bunch of new jobs. You poor people shouldn't be wasting your time with that liberal social engineering! You should be learning Mandarin so you can tap into some of those new jobs those job creators are creating! It's a brave new world!

So, just to clarify your position, Americans don't benefit from cheaper goods made overseas? and you contend that lower-skill jobs going overseas is a zero-sum game as far as American job prospects go? your logic is going to make you look stoopid here

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by sinuous sausage

So, just to clarify your position, Americans don't benefit from cheaper goods made overseas? and you contend that lower-skill jobs going overseas is a zero-sum game as far as American job prospects go? your logic is going to make you look stoopid here

I love it when you guys just pull one little sentence out of context and pretend that's the whole argument and you can ignore the rest. It's how you stay deluded. Anyway, speaking of stoopid, here's some of those "lower skill jobs" you're talking about:

More than 3 million manufacturing jobs have disappeared since 1998, and the Economic Policy Institute estimates 59 percent—or 1.78 million—of these jobs have been lost due to the explosion in the U.S. manufacturing trade deficit over the period.

Goldman Sachs estimates 400,000–600,000 professional services and information sector jobs moved overseas in the past few years, accounting for about half of the total net job loss in the sector over the period. A Deloitte Research survey found one-third of all major financial institutions are already sending work offshore, with 75 percent reporting they would do so within the next 24 months. A U.C. Berkeley study found 25,000 to 30,000 new outsourcing-related jobs advertised in India by U.S. firms in just one month in 2003.

One service sector hard hit by job losses is information technology, especially software. The pro-outsourcing consulting firm Global Insight estimates we lost 104,000 information technology jobs to offshore outsourcing between 2000 and 2003, more than a quarter of the 372,000 jobs lost in the sector overall during the period. The Economic Policy Institute found employment in U.S. software-producing industries fell by 128,000 jobs from 2000 to early 2004, while about 100,000 new jobs producing software for export to the U.S. were created in India over the same period of time.
http://www.aflcio.org/issues/jobseco...g_problems.cfm

BTW, the other name for "cheaper goods" is cheap, Chinese crap.

[alkemical]

Ro ~ The chinese are also investing in their citizens by giving them a radioshak & 3d printers to play with.

We're not doing anything to compete in that market. We've also lost that infrastructure (which is good also in a way - due to advances - you can retrofit empty walmarts into state of the art production areas).

We really need to evaluate how we do things - time to up/re-cycle and build out of that. If we're going to be consumers, we need to make our disposable culture completely recyclable.

[Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by alkemical

Ro ~ The chinese are also investing in their citizens by giving them a radioshak & 3d printers to play with.

We're not doing anything to compete in that market. We've also lost that infrastructure (which is good also in a way - due to advances - you can retrofit empty walmarts into state of the art production areas).

We really need to evaluate how we do things - time to up/re-cycle and build out of that. If we're going to be consumers, we need to make our disposable culture completely recyclable.

Here's what's happening: Globalization is placing all workers around the world on the same economic plane. That means the working people in the industrialized world are now competing with the workers in the Third World. Like water, wages will equalize over time. Those workers who are richer, like us in the U.S., will have to go down. While those in the Third World come up. Goods are being made cheaper so all the workers can buy them. Necessarily, other things will also have to equalize.

Third World workers don't have forty hour weeks, paid vacations, safety regulations, breaks, sick days or any of the other union provided worker benefits. In fact, in many nations, like China, unions are against the law. If you are found to be a member of a union in China, you go to prison (now there's a law American capitalists could learn to love). So while the lives of American workers get worse and worse, the global investor class is seeing the largest returns on investment that they've ever seen. And here in America, tax and regulation policies written by their owned legislatures allow them to hold onto all those assets, or hide them offshore. For us, debt peonage. For them, the biggest partay in the history of man.

[alkemical]

Ok.

[SleepingTiger]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Here's what's happening: Globalization is placing all workers around the world on the same economic plane. That means the working people in the industrialized world are now competing with the workers in the Third World. Like water, wages will equalize over time. Those workers who are richer, like us in the U.S., will have to go down. While those in the Third World come up. Goods are being made cheaper so all the workers can buy them. Necessarily, other things will also have to equalize.

Third World workers don't have forty hour weeks, paid vacations, safety regulations, breaks, sick days or any of the other union provided worker benefits. In fact, in many nations, like China, unions are against the law. If you are found to be a member of a union in China, you go to prison (now there's a law American capitalists could learn to love). So while the lives of American workers get worse and worse, the global investor class is seeing the largest returns on investment that they've ever seen. And here in America, tax and regulation policies written by their owned legislatures allow them to hold onto all those assets, or hide them offshore. For us, debt peonage. For them, the biggest partay in the history of man.

When i worked for Siemens and traveled in Grand rapids MI. I was shocked at how lazy the Grand rapids workers were. We all worked for Siemens, only difference was that the Grand rapids folks were unionized. I was in charge of team and had a deadline to test the equipment that the grand rapids employees had built and get it ready for deployment. Getting them to fix the equipment that they build in a decent amount of time was impossible. Fixing it myself was a big no no because i was taking away there job. I was under tremendous pressure from management to get these system ready. The best part, while the grand rapids employee were fixing the equipment (more like sitting there doing absolutely nothing) they were gloating about getting paid overtime. Thats my experience with union workers... i understand that unions are good for workers rights, however i feel they have too much power.

[Pony Boy]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

What did the economy look like when Bush entered office?

What did it look like when he left?

That is all.

Vote for Republicans!

The National debt was $10 Trillion when Obama took office and it will soon be $16 Trillion.

That is all

Vote to re-elect Obama

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

Give us all a break, will ya? Bush squandered the wealth of this country spending like a drunken sailor while throwing totally irresponsible tax breaks out to his "base." He was a disaster for this country. And you a-holes on the Right are so lacking in class and character that you blame the guy who follows him for the mess, even obstructing the clean up at every turn.

FTW!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Pony Boy

The National debt was $10 Trillion when Obama took office and it will soon be $16 Trillion.

How convenient for you to leave out the reason for the spending on Obama's watch, viz., to prevent a complete economic meltdown resulting from your hero's malfeasance/mismanagement.

[Arkie]

Notice a trend?

Top Contributors to George W. Bush

1. Morgan Stanley $603,480
2. Merrill Lynch $586,254
3. PricewaterhouseCoopers $514,250
4. UBS AG $474,325
5. Goldman Sachs $394,600

Top Contributors to Obama

1. University of California $1,648,685
2. Goldman Sachs $1,013,091
3. Harvard University $878,164

Top Contributors to Mitt Romney

1. Goldman Sachs $367,200
2. Credit Suisse Group $203,750
3. Morgan Stanley $199,800

Top Contributors to Ron Paul

1. US Army $24,503
2. US Air Force $23,335
3. US Navy $17,432