Print

[ducksoup]

So much for Obama and the Democrats carving out any change that they promised.

First of all Bush and Obama should have let all those poorly run corporations fail, just like ENRON got to fail, then the asses that caused the problems (I am sure that there was some (or a TON) of market manipulation and fraud involved) be prosecuted just like the ENRON execs.  Instead we just keep appointing them to government positions.  How many Goldman Sachs execs work for or worked for Bush and Obama?

We send billions of dollars to other countries when we have more trouble at home than we know what to do with.  Bush and Cheney had Haliburtan and Blackwater, Obama has Soros and GE.

The spending is killing our country but since Bush did it Obama feels it is OK to make the same mistake three fold.

The wars we are involved in were unjust when Bush started them and they are putting additional unneeded strain on our country financially.  I was under the understanding that these wars were coming to an end under an Obama Administration, they have not, and do not appear to be any time soon.  It appears that we are beginning to lose control in Afghanistan and MORE troops will be needed.

You partisans crack me up!  You somehow or another think the way to follow up the worst Administration in the past 100 years is to support the worst Administration in the next 100 years.  You have yourselves painted into a corner.  Obama and Bush have done and are doing things that are disastrous for our country but you bite your tongues if "your guy" is in the House, and scream bloody murder when "the other guy" resides there.  You guys argue like politics is a big game, Republicans vs Democrats.  While you all are distracted with your inability to see that there is no difference between the parties anymore you fail to notice both parties have been shooting at the same goal for about 21 years now.

In case you missed it the Bush Administration was less conservative than the Clinton Administration and we are supposed to believe that Clinton was the big bad Liberal devil.

The bailouts did not happen because they had to.  Had nothing happened in September there would have been some companies that went away but in reality they probably should have anyways.  Instead of collapse and investigation, we got bailout and printing of cash. 

Neither Administration or Party has the common sense or forsight to see that the end result of what is happening today [outrageous spending] is not an artificially boosted economy (short term result), the end result will be the utter collapse of our economy as we know it.  Bush started us down this road, and Obama is going to do his best to finish the job, and you know what?  A broken country is exactly what the suits in DC want.  It was the current Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel that stated a good crisis should not be wasted.  And yet we argue and bicker with each other?  All in the name of Republican or Democrat?  The wolves have run off the foxes that were guarding the henhouse!  I always wonder that when Bush and Obama met after the election for dinner and to talk transition if Obama just didn't flat out shake Bush's hand and say "You've got us off to a good start, I'll take it from here."

When I first started posting here I used the tag line "Dance puppets dance....".  You are and Washington thanks you.

So in short to answer Kopke's question:  NOTHING!

The Obama administration has done nothing that will lead our economy to any long term recovery.  No different now than the last 8 years.  Only the economy and the American people can fix the economy.

an interesting post jbs.
As I remember it, the Enron failure caused a pretty severe recession. My memory could be wrong on the severity. 
So, we can disagreee on the way it was handled, or is being handled.  I have ask though, why can't they be investigated and charged.  Whether they fail or not doesn't change breaking the law.  Wasn't the way that Enron broke the law and caused a huge economic mess a great deal like the morgage crisis.  If the rules/regulations would have been fixed back then, maybe it would not have let them do what they did.  That isn't accusing any party, just a wonder - what if.
ANother question I ask is, remember that stimulus check thing that Bush did in the endof 07 and paid out in early 08?  $600 for single and $12,000 for couples?  WHy was that.  THat was a huge payout.  WHy?  Is it possible that they knew what was coming, saw the crisis that did come, yet did nothing to prevent it, just a stall?  To me I can't even come close to any other answer for that stimulus check  thing other than that.  THat they knew it was coming and were stalling it off.  MY opinion only, haven't read that anywhere, just a wonder.
During the campaign, Obama never said he would get out of Afghanistan, rather said he wanted to get Bin Ladin/Taliban.  I would rather see both end and all the soldiers come home.

Overseas spending has bothered me for decades.  I just don't get it.  WHy do we spend the extreme amounts that we do giving "gifts" to other countries?  Why do we have military bases all over teh world.  In this day and age a large force can be anywhere pretty quickly.  Why do we need the gigantic military base in Germany?  Close them down, they are not needed.  Bring those troops home too.

[SidecarFlip]

Yeah, that's what I heard, Duck, but I didn't see any tax cut in my paycheck....  And with BO spending all this fake money they're printing, along with a "tax cut" for 95% of us working slobs, where are they going to get the money to pay back all the money he's borrowed?

True, Bush managed to get the deficit up to around 1.3 Trillion after eight years (no, I am not a Bush fan).  But Obama increased the deficit to over 3 Trillion (possibly much more) in just a few months!  That is NOT the answer, people.  That's like paying off one of your credit cards with another credit card, then going right out and spend so much on the first card, to where it's maxed out again!  Now you have TWO cards to pay off.

But what the hell!!!  You had a lot of fun shopping while you did it, huh?

Makes no friggin sense to me.

This country is in a LOT of trouble.

Going to be a long, COLD winter in many ways for a lot of people and not just citizens living in the north either.

[livewire]

Just pulling numbers from my head live, but I think that Bush increased teh debt by 5or 5 1/2 trillion to just over 11 trillion total.   Not sure if those numbers are perfect, but pretty sure they are real close.

ANd thanks for expressing your views without personal insults.  It makes communicating a lot easier.

I think those numbers are pretty accurate, as far as I can recollect.  And I don't argue politics anymore, DS.   
I prefer to have a calm discussion of how I feel, and why I feel that way. 

I understand other people have different opinions (liberal, conservative), and I respect that.  I even understand their way of thinking, usually, although I may not agree with it.

I am primarily very conservative, although I do understand some liberal points of view.  However, I am NOT a Republican - I feel the Republican Party is just as bad as the Democratic Party these days.  I don't care what their talking heads say - they both look out for the rich (because THAT'S who is in congress), and they both think that the average working man isn't worth two dead flies.

When it comes to the economy, it is a VERY complex issue, and no one person has all the answers.  But I personally believe (whether right or wrong) in the fundamentals - keep government spending low, eliminate government waste, and keep taxes low.  If the average working man can keep more of his pay, he will spend more, which improves tax revenue, and fuels the economic engine.

IMO, going into a LOT more debt (which history has shown will never be paid back), in order to give the economy a shot in the arm, is not the answer. 

During the Carter years, when people were paying 12% interest on their homes (I had good credit, and a business loan with 21% interest - which put me out of business), the economy was bleeding to death because of government spending, and high taxes.  Reagan fixed it by simply lowering taxes, which actually INCREASED revenue, and balanced the budget.  The Bushes, Clinton, and Obama learned nothing from that experience.

[T-M-T]

Here's the way I look at it:

While deficit spending is usually a bad thing, the jolt of stimulus spending may be the only hope to jump-start the economy at this point.

Let me make an analogy:  Subjecting your body to a shock with high-voltage electricity is a bad thing and can cause numerous problems, including death.  But when your heart stops and cannot be restarted by cardiac massage or other means, the last resort is often that same type of electrical shock and that process, which seems counter-intuitive, has saved many lives.

Desperate times call for desperate measures. Once we recover from the initial shock, hopefully our economy will recover and beat strongly again.

[livewire]

First of all Bush and Obama should have let all those poorly run corporations fail, just like ENRON got to fail, then the asses that caused the problems (I am sure that there was some (or a TON) of market manipulation and fraud involved) be prosecuted just like the ENRON execs.  Instead we just keep appointing them to government positions.  How many Goldman Sachs execs work for or worked for Bush and Obama?

We send billions of dollars to other countries when we have more trouble at home than we know what to do with.  Bush and Cheney had Haliburtan and Blackwater, Obama has Soros and GE.

The spending is killing our country but since Bush did it Obama feels it is OK to make the same mistake three fold.

The wars we are involved in were unjust when Bush started them and they are putting additional unneeded strain on our country financially.  I was under the understanding that these wars were coming to an end under an Obama Administration, they have not, and do not appear to be any time soon.  It appears that we are beginning to lose control in Afghanistan and MORE troops will be needed.

In case you missed it the Bush Administration was less conservative than the Clinton Administration and we are supposed to believe that Clinton was the big bad Liberal devil.

The bailouts did not happen because they had to.  Had nothing happened in September there would have been some companies that went away but in reality they probably should have anyways.  Instead of collapse and investigation, we got bailout and printing of cash. 

Neither Administration or Party has the common sense or forsight to see that the end result of what is happening today [outrageous spending] is not an artificially boosted economy (short term result), the end result will be the utter collapse of our economy as we know it.  Bush started us down this road, and Obama is going to do his best to finish the job, and you know what?  A broken country is exactly what the suits in DC want.  It was the current Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel that stated a good crisis should not be wasted.  And yet we argue and bicker with each other?  All in the name of Republican or Democrat?  The wolves have run off the foxes that were guarding the henhouse!  I always wonder that when Bush and Obama met after the election for dinner and to talk transition if Obama just didn't flat out shake Bush's hand and say "You've got us off to a good start, I'll take it from here."

The Obama administration has done nothing that will lead our economy to any long term recovery.  No different now than the last 8 years.  Only the economy and the American people can fix the economy.

Awesome post, JBS. 

I agree with everything in your quote.

What many people fail to realize is that the economy is made up of more than just big companies...  Sure, if a huge company fails, there MAY be ripple effects that will go down through the economy, but what has a much bigger effect (and it's slower to see the effects), is the viability of small businesses.  Small businesses employ the majority of Americans - NOT huge corporations.  If the small businesses are healthy, the big corporations will benefit.  Ford Motor Company can't survive if their only customers are Ford employees.  If small businesses are failing, many people will become unemployed, causing the ripples to go up to the big corporations.  People working at the local diner, or small hardware store, that just went out of business won't have the money to buy a new car, or pay their mortgage, or invest in their retirement.  These failures affect the big companies more than the occasional failure of a huge corporation.  Especially when these small business failures happen by the thousands.  THAT is what is happening now.  It just doesn't make the news.

Look around our community.  Look at the For Lease signs everywhere.  Look at the businesses that have gone away.  That is the root of the problem, IMO.

When do the small businesses get a bailout?

[livewire]

 I have ask though, why can't they be investigated and charged.  Whether they fail or not doesn't change breaking the law.  Wasn't the way that Enron broke the law and caused a huge economic mess a great deal like the morgage crisis.  If the rules/regulations would have been fixed back then, maybe it would not have let them do what they did.  That isn't accusing any party, just a wonder - what if.

ANother question I ask is, remember that stimulus check thing that Bush did in the endof 07 and paid out in early 08?  $600 for single and $12,000 for couples?  WHy was that.  THat was a huge payout.  WHy?  Is it possible that they knew what was coming, saw the crisis that did come, yet did nothing to prevent it, just a stall?

During the campaign, Obama never said he would get out of Afghanistan, rather said he wanted to get Bin Ladin/Taliban. I would rather see both end and all the soldiers come home.

Overseas spending has bothered me for decades. I just don't get it.  WHy do we spend the extreme amounts that we do giving "gifts" to other countries?  Why do we have military bases all over teh world.  In this day and age a large force can be anywhere pretty quickly.  Why do we need the gigantic military base in Germany?  Close them down, they are not needed.  Bring those troops home too.

Again, I agree with these points, Ducksoup.

We give away SOOOoooo much money (our hard-earned tax dollars) to other countries... For what?  So they can be our friend?  When the towers fell, how many of those countries came to help us?

I can see some reasons to have SOME military bases around the globe, located in allied nations.  But the B.S. that has been going on in Iraq and Afghanistan should NEVER have been started.  Bring our brave men and women home.  If they want peace in that region, they will now have to step up to the plate, and shed some of THEIR soldier's blood to get it.

But that will never happen.  I knew that when Bush went into Iraq.  That region has been at war for centuries.  That will not change.

[ducksoup]

I think those numbers are pretty accurate, as far as I can recollect.  And I don't argue politics anymore, DS.   
I prefer to have a calm discussion of how I feel, and why I feel that way. 

I understand other people have different opinions (liberal, conservative), and I respect that.  I even understand their way of thinking, usually, although I may not agree with it.

I am primarily very conservative, although I do understand some liberal points of view.  However, I am NOT a Republican - I feel the Republican Party is just as bad as the Democratic Party these days.  I don't care what their talking heads say - they both look out for the rich (because THAT'S who is in congress), and they both think that the average working man isn't worth two dead flies.

When it comes to the economy, it is a VERY complex issue, and no one person has all the answers.  But I personally believe (whether right or wrong) in the fundamentals - keep government spending low, eliminate government waste, and keep taxes low.  If the average working man can keep more of his pay, he will spend more, which improves tax revenue, and fuels the economic engine.

IMO, going into a LOT more debt (which history has shown will never be paid back), in order to give the economy a shot in the arm, is not the answer. 

During the Carter years, when people were paying 12% interest on their homes (I had good credit, and a business loan with 21% interest - which put me out of business), the economy was bleeding to death because of government spending, and high taxes.  Reagan fixed it by simply lowering taxes, which actually INCREASED revenue, and balanced the budget.  The Bushes, Clinton, and Obama learned nothing from that experience.

Some I agree with, others not so much.  What I most like is that you are rational.  That is what this forum, and this country need far more of. 
I know a lot think I am prety left.  I really don't think so.  I do think that, for the most part, Republican/conservatives stand more for the rich and big corporations, and Democrats/liberals more for teh average person.  I know that is simplistic and that far too many, if not all, are in the pocket of the wealthy or corporate donors.  But, generally within the payoffs the Republicans favor the wealthy, and Democrats favor the people a bit more than the wealthy.  THe realist in me knows that no matter teh outcome, the wealthy will profit from whatever either one does.

AS for the economy.  I am lacking in skill to really know which way is up.  Do you do this or that, do nothing or something?  I get confused over the WAY that things are done.  I guess it is like doing taxes.  Why does it take an accountant  to partially understand them?  Why can't he tax forms be simple.  You made this much, you pay this much.. period.  NO, did you qualify for this or that.  Credit for this or that.  Eliminate all deductions.  Just a plain old, you owe this much.  Why would a pizza joint need to get a tax criedit for depreciation on a pizza oven, when they need it to operate anyway.  Why give the incentive for something required.  THe same goes for most things that are depreciated.

[ducksoup]

Again, I agree with these points, Ducksoup.

We give away SOOOoooo much money (our hard-earned tax dollars) to other countries... For what?  So they can be our friend?  When the towers fell, how many of those countries came to help us?

I can see some reasons to have SOME military bases around the globe, located in allied nations.  But the B.S. that has been going on in Iraq and Afghanistan should NEVER have been started.  Bring our brave men and women home.  If they want peace in that region, they will now have to step up to the plate, and shed some of THEIR soldier's blood to get it.

But that will never happen.  I knew that when Bush went into Iraq.  That region has been at war for centuries.  That will not change.

the massive base in Germany is not needed.  It was there when the wall was up, when the USSR still existed.  I do think we need a large presence in South Korea.  If for nothing else, to keep the crazy guy from doing too much.

Why do we have an agreement to defend Saudi Arabia?  Don't they have enough of our money to pay for their own military?

Edited to add: I think Democrats are worse at giving out those big dollars to other countries.  not exclusive, but worse.

[Frenchfry]

Here's the way I look at it:

While deficit spending is usually a bad thing, the jolt of stimulus spending may be the only hope to jump-start the economy at this point.

Let me make an analogy:  Subjecting your body to a shock with high-voltage electricity is a bad thing and can cause numerous problems, including death.  But when your heart stops and cannot be restarted by cardiac massage or other means, the last resort is often that same type of electrical shock and that process, which seems counter-intuitive, has saved many lives.

Desperate times call for desperate measures. Once we recover from the initial shock, hopefully our economy will recover and beat strongly again.

Well said!

It's too bad the righties are unable to understand that simple concept

[John Kopke]

Getting back to the original post of the topic. The point,
which was lost discussing issues mentioned, is we are
chasing our tails on all these issues and not focusing on the economy.

For the partisans, I will gladly concede the economy Bush left was a mess. Can we now get past that and focus on what we do now.

Here is some things I think we should be doing do:

* Forget Cap & Trade. This will not boost the economy. It will place an additional burden on the economy.

* Why are we making $ 2 billion, we don't have, available to
Brazil to develope their offshore oil? How many American jobs will that create? We could be developing our own oil
and natural gas supplies and creating good union jobs.
Private industry would pay for developement. Bring in billions of royalties to the States and Federal government.
Further, supplies we produce domestically is that much less we have to buy from foreign sources. Strenthens the dollar.

* Take a good portion of the remaining stimulous and provide business tax incentives. We need to provide benefits for unemployed etc., but the government is too damn stratified to make things happen quickly. Look at government still fumbling the payouts for cash for clunkers.
It wouldn't take a 1500 page bill to make incentives happen.

* Dump bio-fuels. This is costing us billions in subsidies and bio fuels still can't compete. Majority of bio-fuel co. going broke and capacity down to like 20%. 

* Why can't we start reducing health care costs by looking at things that reduce, rather than increase, costs and don't
involve a 1000 + page legislative monstrosity nobody really
understands. Tort reform. Get rid of frivolous lawsuits many
of which are essentially legal extortion. Doing so reduces Doctor liability insurance and reduces extra testing to
cover against lawsuits. Examine all the regulatory mandates states have enacted that kill competition. A 24 year old doesn't need the coverage of a 60 year old. But the policy loaded with mandates the 24 year old must choose is so expensive he blows it off altogether. Another uninsured person. Buy health insurance across state lines. If one states mandates are so burdensome and expensive go elsewhere. Many more items to look at that don't cost anything or create and expensive beauracracy. Then
once we're past depression see where we're at. Get serious
about rooting out fraud in Medicare. Seen numbers like
$ 70 billion a year. If government did that the public would
certainly be more receptive to other government health proposals. If Washington insists that we need public option
health care let Congress and Senate sign up as a test
case and report back in three years after they've gotten the kinks out.

* People should demand, and stay on, Congress to get serious about doing a line by line examination of the Federal budget. There are 1399 programs concerning the use of rural land. 34 low housing programs ..............
Would anyone argue there are hundreds and hundreds of billions going down a rat hole to no good purpose. There
are 30K lobbyists in Washington. The reason they are there is because that is where the money is. Less money
equals less special interests.

* Audit the Federal Reserve. These folks are creating money of of thin air. Most all the debt created during the bubble was money created out thin air. FIAT money.
This is the cause of all the boom and bust cycles we
experience and it is crushing the value of the dollar.
Why do you think that $ 240K house you bought 4 years
ago is now worth $ 150K? This is a huge issue that the
people need to get up to speed on. The Pols and Wall Street bankers are teamed up and hosing the folks big time.

Folks this isn't a Democrat or Republican issue. It is a big government issue that is strangling this country and leading us down a path of doom. It must be reversed.

[old salt]

It's a simple concept that I understand.  The problem is the country did not have a heart attack.  Maybe a headache, sprained wrist, or even a cut.   Electric shock is not needed for those things. 

So what does the govt do for the above ailments.  Stick a knife into the citizens until their heart stops, then performs cardiac massage, and sends us on our way. 

The cut is still bleeding, the wrist is still sprained and the head still hurts. And now we have a knife in us.  And it only cost $1.5 trillion...for now.

The government (congress) are not doctors, nor are they economists.  When they get involved, the situation always gets worse.  They did nothing to jump start the economy.

Here's the way I look at it:

While deficit spending is usually a bad thing, the jolt of stimulus spending may be the only hope to jump-start the economy at this point.

Let me make an analogy:  Subjecting your body to a shock with high-voltage electricity is a bad thing and can cause numerous problems, including death.  But when your heart stops and cannot be restarted by cardiac massage or other means, the last resort is often that same type of electrical shock and that process, which seems counter-intuitive, has saved many lives.

Desperate times call for desperate measures. Once we recover from the initial shock, hopefully our economy will recover and beat strongly again.

[Frenchfry]

It's a simple concept that I understand.  The problem is the country did not have a heart attack.  Maybe a headache, sprained wrist, or even a cut.   Electric shock is not needed for those things. 

So what does the govt do for the above ailments.  Stick a knife into the citizens until their heart stops, then performs cardiac massage, and sends us on our way. 

The cut is still bleeding, the wrist is still sprained and the head still hurts. And now we have a knife in us.  And it only cost $1.5 trillion...for now.

The government (congress) are not doctors, nor are they economists.  When they get involved, the situation always gets worse.  They did nothing to jump start the economy.

OMG!
You can't be serious
Okay I'll try to an adult and shut up now 

[Frenchfry]

One little point for JK:
Pew Finds Clean Energy Economy Generates Significant Job Growth
The number of jobs in America’s emerging clean energy economy grew nearly two and a half times faster than overall jobs between 1998 and 2007, according to a report (PDF) released today by The Pew Charitable Trusts.  Pew developed a clear, data-driven definition of the clean energy economy and conducted the first-ever hard count across all 50 states of the actual jobs, companies and venture capital investments that supply the growing market demand for environmentally friendly products and services.

Pew found that jobs in the clean energy economy grew at a national rate of 9.1 percent, while traditional jobs grew by only 3.7 percent between 1998 and 2007.  There was a similar pattern at the state level, where job growth in the clean energy economy outperformed overall job growth in 38 states and the District of Columbia during the same period.  The report also found that this promising sector is poised to expand significantly, driven by increasing consumer demand, venture capital infusions, and federal and state policy reforms.
http://www.pewtrusts.org/news_room_detail.aspx?id=53254

[ducksoup]

The economic collapse is not something minor.  They are holding bad debt to the tune of 6 to 9 TRILLION in bad debt, private debt, not federal government.  That didn't happen by accident, and the problem didn't go away.  The stimulus only tried to keep the capital flowing so business could continue.

I suppose it could be perception, but I think that many trillions is major something, not a cut.

[John Kopke]

One little point for JK:
Pew Finds Clean Energy Economy Generates Significant Job Growth
The number of jobs in America’s emerging clean energy economy grew nearly two and a half times faster than overall jobs between 1998 and 2007, according to a report (PDF) released today by The Pew Charitable Trusts.  Pew developed a clear, data-driven definition of the clean energy economy and conducted the first-ever hard count across all 50 states of the actual jobs, companies and venture capital investments that supply the growing market demand for environmentally friendly products and services.

Pew found that jobs in the clean energy economy grew at a national rate of 9.1 percent, while traditional jobs grew by only 3.7 percent between 1998 and 2007.  There was a similar pattern at the state level, where job growth in the clean energy economy outperformed overall job growth in 38 states and the District of Columbia during the same period.  The report also found that this promising sector is poised to expand significantly, driven by increasing consumer demand, venture capital infusions, and federal and state policy reforms.
http://www.pewtrusts.org/news_room_detail.aspx?id=53254

FF:
Well I'd be a lot more impressed if these various green jobs
were being created by the private sector, without huge government subsidies. Further, I'd be happy to use electricity from windmills, or solar panels, if it didn't cost
me three times what I'm paying now.

Long and short is the vast majority of these green jobs would disappear if they weren't propped up by government
subsidies, or government mandates that force people to buy the outrageously expensive energy they produce.