Will Obama fix the economy?

Post Reply New Topic

Yep. Both Joe the Plumber and the fat cats want money. Maybe Joe should just get the money to buy a house first before anything?

Oh, don't worry about it. Even Swedes make fun of the Finns.

FWIW, most of the problems with cost overruns in the US came from Enviornmentalists who apparantly dislike power generation of ANY type...

Lawsuits cost time and money, and the Haters have lots of both... so yeah, it's tough to get a power plant (of any type) built on time and within budget.

Ive always wondered why the Lefty Enviornmental types hate Nuclear power, but the following may very well sum it up: "the delayed negative emotional reaction to the discovery, somewhere around a hundred thousand years ago, of fire."

Think of all the things that these folks HATE:

Smoking
Consumption of Meat (usually cooked over, you guessed it, Fire)
Internal Combustion Engines
Power Generation (Coal, Gas, Nuke (visualized as a Nuclear Fireball/Mushroom cloud) etc
Firearms
Garbage inceneration (waste to energy)
Logging (wood as fuel),
etc.

It really does make sense once you thik about it.

Oh, so close!

No, I want the president to fail AT destroying the country. If he turned around tomorrow and started fixing the economy, instead of ensuring capitalism's collapse (something far-left Dems like him and his friends would love to see happen) through his endless injections into it of nationalizing handouts, then I'd be cheering him on. But no: His mission is to show that capitalism fails, and if he has to give it a nudge (or several huge shoves) to prove we need to abandon capitalism, then he's obviously more than willing to lead its fall.

Yeah, that seriously annoys me, i WANT us to take care of the planet, but all the enviromental groups are radical nutjobs who do more harm than good half the time. And we seem to have lost the only real voice of reason among that movement..... poor steve irwin..

Anyway! I'm surprised no one's commented on one of the things i find most surprising about the stimulus plan: that the vast majority of it is actually going to tax breaks and personal relief funds.
......so, tell me again, WHY are the republicans complaining? Aren't they the ones saying that taxes are bad? Second, a lot of the other funds are going to large projects, and funding for things like schools, which , if it doesn't create jobs, will certianly keep the existing ones there, as opposed to having untold numbers of public employees laid off.

While i still think spending THIS much money so soon is a bit of a risky move, i really wish people would actually LOOK at it before declaring it'll be the doom of the entire country.

Ha Ha...Tax Breaks.

Agreed

I don't think Obama will fix the economy simply because he can only serve 2 terms. If he had 4-5 then maybe.

I dunno dude, FDR managed to bring us out of the great depression by the end of HIS second term

Well, if you like the way he did it... you are the right age to be forced to carry a rifle into a combat zone. I'm old enough to be out of it.

Good Luck!

Dead wrong. In 1937 unemployment was just as high as it was in 1933. What got the U.S. out of the Depression was war. Hitler did more for the U.S. in that regard, than did FDR and his no-called New Deal, which was really a No Deal. It did not work.

ruveyn

It's just adding $800 billion more of debt, and it's not going to fix anything. I mean, Bush's "stimulus" plan just directly gave millions of people checks for $600 and it helped the economy by 0.25% for one quarter. Obama's package is full of extremely minor tax cuts and a bunch of other crap spending that isn't going to help the economy. Printing money out of thin air and throwing it around isn't going to solve the underlying problem here.


-Stop bailing out all these banks and corporations and let them fail like they deserve to.
-Abolish the Federal Reserve and fractional reserve banking in their entirety.
-Cut useless spending (nuclear weapons, foreign aid, and the Iraq war would be a good place to start)
-Cut taxes, but cut spending by even MORE, and continue cutting spending until we have balanced budgets and start paying off the debt.
-Stop printing so much money, so people can have savings without having to worry about inflation and constantly being in debt.
-Throw the corporate crooks in prison where they belong.

Last edited by Cyanide on 04 Mar 2009, 1:10 am, edited 1 time in total.

Umm...

I hope you wewrn't commenting on my response because WWII is exactly what I was alluding to...

It is a symptom and a cause at the same time: A high Dow says that assets are regarded with high prices. The recently very high stock and real estate price in relation to relative constant consumer price was an inflation of asset prices not reflecting the real value of the respective assets.

The current recession is the logic consequence of a needed re-assessment process. False wealth is going to be destroyed - a general healthy process. The current crisis has less to do with Great Depression but much more with collapse of the Banque Royale in France 1720 when this piece of paper were reduced to their real value:

I do not think that taking about "confidence" hits the point: Confidence is build up by keeping the books in good shape. The US-budget is since eight years deep in the red; the current balance of the country too.

I would try first to bring this into order: So less spending, higher taxes, less consumption. The current situation is that the US consume since decades more than it is producing. For a while this may be able to bare, especially if your currency is the main reserve currency of the world, but it can't be reasonable to run such a system for decades.

The current policy of Obama will not fix this problems, if anything will go write, he will win some time, because other states have to many Dollars in their central banks stored, which would become worthless if a full re-assessment of US-assets would be done. If Obama uses this time to fix the economic base of US by bringing consumption and production into a balance it may work, but this would be a game with very high stakes.

I think that Rush Limbaugh's followers used to say that the impact of a president's policies doesn't have any effect until the next president is in office. So, the good times that we had in the 1990s, when Bill Clinton was in office, were due to the wise policies of George Bush I. And, the terrible times that we had during the years of George Bush II were as a result of President Clinton's mismanagement. Since we can't blame a Republican for the present mess, we'll just have to attribute the problems to Bill Clinton.

But, given the time lag, President Obama will fix the economy while the next president is in office, if the Rush Limbaugh explanations apply to Democrats as well as Republicans.

So, it couldn't possibly be that Democrats constantly have to clean up the mess made by Republicans?